User talk:Jautumn

Welcome!

Hello, Jautumn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Nader

WP policy says no google URLs in articles, not no google URLs. There is nothing wrong with putting search URLs on talk pages, and is often done to demonstrate whether an article should be named one thing or another. The way Wikipedia is edited you really don't need to be an expert on a subject, because you are prohibited from putting in anything that isn't verifiable and referenced. While I admit that most subjects I have no way of knowing whether they are correct or not, I can read the references, and see if the references support what is written. If not, I can delete any or all of the article if I wish. You will find that a lot of Wikipedia writing just involves things like vandal patrol WP:RCP and simple copy editing Wikipedia:Cleanup. You will often hear people talk about articles that need to be Wikified, or that someone Wikified an article, and while I have no clue what that means, part of it is creating a standard structure to an article, and creating a See also and Reference or Notes section. So the point is that you don't have to know anything about a subject to work on that article, and in fact, sometimes it helps if you don't. 199.125.109.107 (talk) 04:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as you haven't posted since January?, I assume you've left Wikipedia. However, if you haven't? I've more to say on Ralph Nader. It's quite possible, the Gore voters (in Florida) who 'accidently' voted for Pat Buchanan? helped GWB. GoodDay (talk) 16:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Common Dreams

Common Dreams uses a "Fair Use" interpretation of copyright laws, and always attributes copyright to the original copyright holder. I don't see any reason not to use them as a link if a primary link is not available. 199.125.109.107 (talk) 23:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use generally covers only excerpts, not written works in their entirety, and when the Post starts charging for an article on-line, posting a link on a worldwid top ten website to a free copy of it re-posted on-line would seem to cause monetary harm to the Post. Maybe it's legit because of some aspect of copyright law I don't understand, but from what I do understand, it's questionable at best. Just because the Post gives free access to it on-line for a couple weeks before starting to charge for it doesn't give everyone who got a free copy perpetual permission to publish it on the web for free. In any case, changing headlines without at least making it clear that it isn't the Post's headline is deceitful and wrong, and raises a fair question whether articles re-posted on commondreams.org have any similar POV alterations within the body-text of re-posted articles as well. Fair_use#Amount_and_substantiality

Where are YOu?

You were all over the Ralph Nader article discussion last December, slinging words like a drunken manure farmer. Where'd you disappear to? What happened? Did you drown in it? 198.172.207.48 (talk) 00:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ya you old geezer hound. You gasbagging like a drunken lush, on and on about your hero Ralph, and now you've disappeared into Kingdom Come. What happened? Did you slip an O-ring? 207.67.145.169 (talk) 03:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]