User talk:Letaylor

Greetings, Larry. I notice that you've recently started editing quite a few Wikipedia articles in your areas of expertise; I can only wonder how many of your colleagues from the DUI college will now follow suit.

Incidentally, while reviewing the profile on your Userpage, I noticed a small error in the text referencing your book "Born to Crime." To wit, you left out the closing quotation mark before the parenthetical reference to Greenwood publishing. Ceteris paribus, I would simply correct the text, but I shy away from modifying other Wikipedians' Userpages. // NetEsq 20:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions to Wikipedia

Larry- You're doing a great (no, make that "fantastic") job on the breathalyzer page. You might be interested in taking a look at the Mothers Against Drunk Driving page as well. It, too, could benefit from you expertise. Best regards.David Justin 03:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blog links, Conflict of Interest & Welcome!

On the other hand, you should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's Extended links guidelines, especially the part that suggests avoiding external links to blogs. Also please see the section on Advertising_and_conflicts_of_interest, vis a vis your contribution to Driving under the influence.

That said, let me add Welcome!

Hello, Letaylor, 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 name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Mwanner | Talk 19:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'll tell you what-- I'm going to be away from any internet connection for the next two months. I think that you probably do warrant an exception to the blog and COI rules; if you restore the links I removed, I will not revert you. That might not be the end of your problems, though, since these are standing guidelines and policies.

If you do run into another cranky editor like me, I would suggest that you paste something similar to what you wrote on my Talk page on the article's Talk page, and hope the other editor's are as reasonable as I am (; ). Good luck, -- Mwanner | Talk 18:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You ran into another cranky editor. Me. It is clear that you write with authority but from a certain perspective. It is equally clear that there is a conflict of interest. Your best bet might be to make chapters of your book available on your website and cite them as treeware references, but this should be done by making suggestions on Talk to avoid the appearance of self-promotion. Guy (Help!) 16:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not be discouraged by your experiences on Wikipedia. There is a powerful deletionist element here on Wikipedia and they only get stronger when you leave in disgust after their activities. Many of them give little thought to the official Wikipedia policies on external links and, of course, it is always quicker to destroy and delete rather than to research and create...

In this regard I would choose to emphasise the primary guidance contained at Wikpedia's External links guideline:
"Adding external links can be a service to our readers, but they should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article" and, immediately below this encapsulation:-

"Wikipedia articles can often be improved by providing links to web pages outside Wikipedia which contain information that can't or shouldn't be added to the article. These links belong in an External links section near the bottom of the article."

I believe you probably have both the talent and inclination to fight your corner with zealot deletionists and if you look at Wikipedia policy you will quickly realise that there is ample support there for your stance. Don't be discouraged until and unless the cranks get an amendment to policy approved so that Wikipedia becomes "opposed to links that have commercial intent".

Gaimhreadhan 15:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:LawrenceEricTaylor.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:LawrenceEricTaylor.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Rette tast 21:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:Lawrence E Taylor.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lawrence E Taylor.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 21:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing with a Conflict of Interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam); and,
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. Flowanda | Talk 14:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]