User talk:Sebastian Lake

Welcome

Hello, Sebastian Lake! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:52, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Teahouse invite

Hello! Sebastian Lake, you're invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse – an awesome place to meet people, ask questions, and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:53, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Sebastian Lake. You have new messages at Ryan Vesey's talk page.
Message added 05:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ryan Vesey Review me! 05:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Sebastian Lake. You have new messages at Ryan Vesey's talk page.
Message added 23:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ryan Vesey Review me! 23:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Sebastian Lake. You have new messages at Ryan Vesey's talk page.
Message added 01:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan, I have edited the Sweet Revenge piece to reflect all of the comments, criticisms etc, from you and Big Wind.

Additionally, I uploaded two jogs to illustrate the piece, as recommend by Big Wind -- like the Southern Comfort entry.

However, I do not know how to adjust the size of the images, to modify them to fit the page.

1) Can you and Big Wind please "sign off" on the editorial changes that you recommended and that I have now made.

2) Can you and Big Wind please adjust the sizes and placement of the photos accordingly, to match the style of the entries that Big Wind likes?

Thank you kindly in advance.

Sebastian Lake (talk) 18:06, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ryan,

BIg Wind took the time to make a bunch of trims and tucks to the text for the Sweet Revenge Liqueur entry, which is great. However, some his choices seem to be subjective, and "incorrect" by US standards. It now reads like it was written by a European for whom English is a second language. It is nice to sound all posh, but I'm wondering if there are standards or rules about using Britishisms in Wikipedia? Going forward, is it preferred that I use "colour" and "flavour"? for example? Please advise?

Also, with respect to the photos, I would really like to know what the objective (not any individual's preference, but, the policy) reasons are for recommending that my photos should be deleted. I am absolutely certain that it is permissible to use these images, in the "real world". If Wikipedia has rules against them, I would like to understand, in order to remedy the issue. For example, going forward, I could get written permission from manufacturers to use my photographs. Etc.

If you and Big Wind (I don't know how to add an addressee to a Talk discussion, and would like to include him here) could please explain, I will be grateful. I have published photos like this in consumer publications in the US for more than 30 years.

Thanks for your help. I want to learn.

Comments left for you

I have left some comments for you at User talk:Sebastian Lake/sandbox. In addition, are you aware of the watchlist function? See help:watching pages. Ryan Vesey Review me! 12:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sweet Revenge Liqueur logo.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sweet Revenge Liqueur logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Night of the Big Wind _talk 12:44, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, Big Wind!

With respect to your desire to delete photographs, I need your advice and guidance on this one. I can't imagine why these photos are objectionable.

Both photos were taken by me, the author. Both images are of products that are in the public domain. The liquor bottle is sold in stores. The logo is from promotion materials that are readily available in the public.

I've published similar images in consumer magazines for decades. If there are specific reasons or objections to these images, can you please explain?

And, if there are objections, can you suggest a remedy, short of deleting them?

Also, thank you for the many "nips and tucks" you've given my copy. I'm not entirely sure I agree with all of your changes, but hey, it really doesn't matter. It is reading smoothly. However, it now reads like it was written by a European who speaks English as a second language. Was that your goal? In particular, I'm wondering about your preference for British spellings. I know you're living in Ireland now, but is there an objective reason for these changes to the Queen's style?

Thank you again. Please take the time to share your thoughts.

Sebastian Lake (talk) 15:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding spelling, please see MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:SPELLING. Probably an article about a product that is found primarily in the U.S. market (and says "Proudly made in the USA" on its label) should use U.S. English. Also, I added some comments on the discussion pages for the logo and bottle deletion discussions that you may find helpful. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:27, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barrel Proof, I left a message for you earlier in a different location godhelpme, about the use of Britishisms in this piece (that's what we call affected British accents, in the New York-based publication I work for). My first reaction was "yikes" -- like yours -- and shared and discussed this with both Ryan and Big Wind. I've softened on this a lot, however, upon reflection. It is kind of wonderful that we are a global community (BIg Wind is actually Dutch, editing English way better than you and I do, working out of Ireland!) and going forward, I think it increasingly likely that we'll learn to "read-through" the colours and flavours without feeling it an offense. If you feel differently, please say so, but frankly it adds a certain polish and cred -- our readers, in the spirits topic area especially, are not exactly American rednecks, and I think it is fine. Tell me if you feel strongly and I guess I'll take the time to change it if desired. But know that every time Big Wind goes in, his spellcheck is going to put up a fight I'm not really interested in having! It is actually kinda fun.

Sebastian Lake (talk) 23:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this is going to be a case where I strongly think that American English should be used. Only one style should be used in the article and the links that BarrelProof provided show that this is a case where that style is American English. I am in no way opposed to using British style, see HMS Doterel (1880), HMS Phoenix (N96) and User:Ryan Vesey/Xerotine siccative. Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Ryan. As promised, the Britishisms are corrected, and I've fixed a few grammar and factual errors that have resulted from the obsessive edits.Sebastian Lake (talk) 20:34, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For the time being, can you please add {{Non-free logo|regtrademark=yes}} and

{{Non-free use rationale logo | Article = | Use =  | Purpose =   | Used for = | Owner = | Description = | Website = | History = | Commentary =  | Source = | Portion = | Low resolution = | Replaceability = | Other information = }} with the parameters filled in to the two images? That will ensure that they are not deleted during the process. Please remark in your descriptions that the image of the logo contains information that is separate from the information on the logo on the bottle so they are both required. Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sweet Revenge Liqueur bottle.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sweet Revenge Liqueur bottle.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Night of the Big Wind _talk 12:46, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, Big Wind! With respect to your desire to delete photographs, I need your advice and guidance on this one. I can't imagine why these photos are objectionable. Both photos were taken by me, the author. Both images are of products that are in the public domain. The liquor bottle is sold in stores. The logo is from promotion materials that are readily available in the public. I've published similar images in consumer magazines for decades. If there are specific reasons or objections to these images, can you please explain? And, if there are objections, can you suggest a remedy, short of deleting them? Also, thank you for the many "nips and tucks" you've given my copy. I'm not entirely sure I agree with all of your changes, but hey, it really doesn't matter. It is reading smoothly. However, it now reads like it was written by a European who speaks English as a second language. Was that your goal? In particular, I'm wondering about your preference for British spellings. I know you're living in Ireland now, but is there an objective reason for these changes to the Queen's style? Thank you again. Please take the time to share your thoughts. Sebastian Lake (talk) 15:17, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'll comment on the file issue tonight, but I have confirmed that it should probably be deleted. As to the British spellings, you are free to change those. Many times, it is difficult to use a spelling that you aren't used to. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:27, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But Wikipedia has incredibly strict copyright requirements. You can take a look through User:Ryan Vesey/Adopt/Copyright and the links on that page and if you have any more questions I'll answer them in a few hours. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan, would it impact on our decisions about the photos if I were to obtain the permission of the producer of Sweet Revenge to use them?

01:11, 7 June 2012 (UTC) Sebastian Lake (talk) 01:11, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I've read the standards about "free" v. "non-free" images, again.

1) It looks to me like the remedy is counterintuitive, but tell me if I have it right. An image that looks generic -- even though I took it, and the product is in the public domain -- is not free. An image that looks like I not only took it, but uniquely styled it, for example, a bottle of Sweet Revenge that is decoratively arranged on a back drop or poured into my own shot glass -- that is, an image that is not likely to be found elsewhere -- is what Wikipedia considers to be okay. Does that sum it up? (I think this is meaning of the "Nicole Kidman" example.

2) If this summary above is correct, then my support for the existing photographs is just that. I have uniquely arranged the bottle on a background that no one else has used for photography. And the logo image is a "stylized" and therefore free image that I created, by isolating and photographing a portion of another object.

3) However, if the justification above is not sufficient, I propose one of two additional remedies. First, I could contact the manufacturer and ask for permission to use these images. I think that is not really Wikipedia's concern, but if that solves the problem, the legwork of getting permission from the manufacturer for permission could be accomplished quickly.

4) And a second remedy would be to re-shoot the photographs in a different style that more adequately addresses Wikipedia's concerns. This is my profession, or part of my profession, and so I can easily accommodate this remedy if required. However, so we three are not "stabbing in the dark", I need specific instruction about this so I understand the parameters.

Back to the Britishisms that Big Wind inserted in the text: hilariously, I cannot change text from American English to Britishisms in Wikipedia without wrestling down the internal spell-check! Frankly, I really don't care. I don't agree with all of Big Wind's changes -- he's trimmed off too much of the Cooper family information and it is back to confusion about which Cooper manufactures Sweet Revenge (and this is exactly what some readers in the world of liquor/spirits will be turning to Wikipedia to research) so we'll need to fix that. But overall, it is just great to have someone do all the tidying up that he has done. So thank you!

Sebastian Lake (talk) 15:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So the problems with your images aren't actually the styles of the images, it is the fact that they contained in each image is something (the logo) that is copyrighted. There is only one way that you could continue to use those exact images and that would be by getting the company to release the logo into the public domain. I doubt that they will do that, because that would allow other companies to use their logo for promotional purposes. (Note that a company cannot give a "Wikipedia-only" permission) Otherwise, I would suggest keeping the logo and adding {{Non-free logo}} and {{Non-free use rationale logo}} to the image. Then the current image of the bottle should be deleted. If you would like to keep the bottle in the article there are two things you can do. One is to have the logo deleted and add the above templates to the page for the image of the bottle. The other is to take a picture of the bottle with the label removed. If you don't care to continue having the image of the bottle on the page, then I would suggest showing a picture of a shot of sweet revenge to highlight the color. Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you have more questions, I can explain things more in depth on IRC. Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:16, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan and Big Wind:

Cool. I totally get it, I think Let me explain an option, and tell me what you think. For some future, editorial purposes, I have already produced images of Sweet Revenge liqueur kind of in situ -- these are styled, "lifestyle" shots in which we see the liqueur but the bottle's label is somewhat obfuscated. That means, the logo is not completely there, is turned away from the camera, etc. We just see the bottle and color. And then we see the liqueur served, in shot glasses and on-ice. Do you think this would be acceptable?

Secondly, my question earlier goes beyond the hypothetical. I reached out directly to the CEO of Independence Spirits, who looked at the post on Wikipedia, and has given permission to use the existing photos to illustrate the entry. Does this suggest a Wikepedia-acceptble solution?

Please let me know how to proceed, Ryan.

Sebastian Lake (talk)

I would like to see your new images, but your description concerns me that they will make the page look like an advertisement again. Hopefully there shouldn't be a problem, and I suggest you upload them so we can examine them. Like I mentioned earlier for your second question. It will be totally fine to use the images if the CEO of Independence Spirits gives permission; however, the permission must be to release it under a Creative Commons license. The list of those licenses is available at Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Free licenses. I would recommend a {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} license. This requires that attribution is given to the creator if the file is re-used. I would like to remind you that this would allow the image to be used for commercial purposes by anybody. If the CEO does agree to this, he should send an email to the Volunteer Response Team using OTRS. This tells you how to do that. If you go that route, add {{OTRS pending}} to the images. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that might be problematic, because my photos look really good. (That's part of my job.) I could consciously make them look bad. Like, here's an idea: the photo could show my hands, so when I hold the bottle, my thumb could obfuscate the label or whatever. Well, I'll find a way to get some images to you, and you can see what you think. I just don't get it though Ryan. I am reviewing countless examples (like, Big Wind's Southern Comfort and Domaine de Canton, for example, which clearly display the bottles and their labels full-on. Why is it okay in those instances? Sebastian Lake (talk) 04:02, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you consider removing the label entirely? I have tagged File:Domainedecanton.jpg for speedy deletion. I have tagged File:Bottleshot.jpg for speedy deletion. File:Southerncomfortlogo2.jpg is in the public domain due to its age. I have tagged File:Southerncomfortnewbottle.jpg, File:Southerncomfortsweettea.jpg, File:Southerncomfortlime.jpg, and File:SoCo Pepper.jpg for deletion. Thank you for bringing those up. Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here's what I'm going to do. I am going to both generate some new photos, while I also forward the permission request to the executive we were discussing earlier. I'd like to clarify: if he gives the permission you're asking for, it doesn't mean that a person is free to create copies of his packaging or something, right? It means, he's giving permission for others to copy and use the photo, only. Please clarify that because of course the first is a non-starter. And meanwhile, I'll have some solutions very soon.

Ryan, what is the normal practice with respect to some of the deep cuts and changes that have been made in the entry text? There are some small tweaks that I want to fix, changes that were made that are simply bad or not good grammar. But I also just disagree with some of the major cuts, and want to return the text to where it was. I've written detailed responses to BarrelProof and DMacks, but what is the correct way to handle this?

Sebastian Lake (talk) 04:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that is an interesting question. I haven't considered it. In this specific instance, he wouldn't need to release the photo in the public domain. Since they are your own work, only you can give permission and you already have. He would need to release the logo into the public domain, but I'm not entirely sure what the results of that would be. I will leave another note at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions and find out for sure. As for your question of the deep cuts and changes, since it is being actively edited by other editors, I suggest listing the proposed changes in a new section on the article's talk page. Other editors will probably review them, otherwise I will try to get a look at it during work or else will check them around 5:00 CDT.The thing I used just now and in the edit before is called an outdent. It is used to signify that I am responding to your comment, but am not indenting because the text area would become too small. Further comments can still respond to this one, but should begin with a one colon indentation as a response. Ryan Vesey Review me! 05:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any minor spelling and grammar changes you would like to make can certainly be made without discussion. Ryan Vesey Review me! 05:32, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A "citation needed" message is now displayed in the Sweet Revenge entry. There are thousands of sources available for this information, too numerous to mention. (SImply Google "Jacquin et Cie oldest producer in US 1884" or something like that and you'll see what I mean). Can you please show me how best to address this, and the mechanics of what this citation should look like? When you have a million choices of citations to choose from, how do you choose? There's a portion of Senate testimony under oath, for example, from the 1970s, that I might choose. But how does a veteran Wikipedian handle this?

Sebastian Lake (talk) 16:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indentation information

Hey, I noticed that your indentation and talk page usage is a little random at times so I thought I would give you some advice. Don't worry, most editors don't understand the exact intricacies of it right away, I sure didn't. Your indentation should always use one more colon than the comment you are responding to. It should directly follow the comment if you are the first person to respond to the comment. If you are not the first person to respond, you should follow the preceding comment and after any responses to that comment. More information and some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Indentation, Wikipedia:Tutorial/Talk pages#Indenting, and Help:Using talk pages#Indentation. In addition, your signature should follow your last comment on the same line, rather than a new one. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This kind of advice is actually hugely helpful. Do not underestimate how truly retarded I am. Despite my line of work, and all appearances to the contrary, I can be a complete moron when it comes to this tech-y stuff, particularly this very old school HTML-ish looking stuff.

For example, I don't know how I got to where I am right now. When you send me messages, I find them in gmail, click on a link, and a two-column formatted WIkipedia page displays with your most current message to me added in the right column. But then what? I don't know how to respond, and have to go digging around until I find this. Which is something I found in my own Talk page.

Anyway, sincere thanks, dude.

Sebastian Lake (talk) 03:55, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note. If while responding to someone you create a new line

like this

you must add the colons before those lines as well. I also took a screenshot of the top of your user talk page so I can explain some of the aspects of it. You may want to click on the image to see a larger version. Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:14, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the guidance on this, Ryan. I think I'm doing it right, now. Listen, I need some help. I'm beginning to feel annoyed with BarrelHead, particularly when I can see all kinds of suspect interests and details in his work, after learning that there are multiple spirits-related pieces under the BarrelHead screen name. I have no beef with this person personally, but I'm really feeling as though the comments and changes to the Sweet Revenge piece go beyond helpful advice or learning the Wikipedia ropes. What's your read of this? Do all Wikipedia entries receive this kind of scrutiny? It is amazing, if so, that anything gets done. And I'm beginning to understand the lack of relevance and watered-down information one finds in many entries on Wikipedia. Please advise. Sebastian Lake (talk) 19:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most pages don't, but once someone picks up an article it is common for them to scrutinize it highly. I agree with BarrelProof that there was information that needed to be removed; however, in removing the things that should have been removed, I think he removed more things than were necessary. Hopefully we can come to an agreement and get that notability tag removed. I'm a bit confused as to what articles you are referring to that he created, here and above, he has only created 5 and they aren't even all related to spirits. Ryan Vesey Review me! 22:14, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your question above, Ryan. As I explained to BottleProof and I think to you in Talk, the Sweet Revenge bottle was designed to mimic the silhouette of a Jack Daniel's bottle. I know this from direct research with the source, but I cannot report it in the entry because of the Original Research rules. As I am not in the business of shilling for any brands, I chose the language "a vintage American whiskey bottle", which is accurate and does the trick. Now, however, the Sweet Revenge article links to several other Wikipedia entries about other whiskey brands. It happens that all of those articles were edited by BarrelProof.

Because Sweet Revenge is a hot topic that is currently seeing a great deal of Google Search activity, if we include the oddball links to other Wikipedia entries about whiskey in the Sweet Revenge entry, it will drive traffic to those entries. I do not know what other screen names BarrelProof uses, but he is clearly focused in this area. I am more than happy to help anyone out with anything, if it is above-board and we are working collaboratively. I want my meager little entry on Sweet Revenge to provide compelling content and generate high-traffic too. But i prefer to discuss this openly -- as I have done when I sought out guidance about redirects, for example.

On the disambiguation page for Sweet Revenge, I bumped the "Sweet Revenge - Liqueur" entry to the top of the page. It has now been bumped back to the bottom again. My rationale for doing this was to lift the singular, high-traffic item to the top, where it will display in the Google Search abstract -- and thereby facilitate the Search and attract more viewers into Wikipedia content. I know you are concerned about disambiguation pages, too. I'd like to see them as ranked, "smart" pages, where the likely high-traffic Search items display high on the page. This is way out of my pay grade, but I'm wondering if Wikipedia could support smarter, dynamic disambiguation pages? Meanwhile, that's my hands-on, lo-fi rationale for why I changed that page. Sebastian Lake (talk) 23:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possible article for creation

Since this is the second time the difficulty has occurred in the article [1] [2], you should consider creating an article on a shot. Ryan Vesey Review me! 05:32, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ryan and BarrelProof. I'll prepare a shots entry.Sebastian Lake (talk) 03:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some details that I think are useful to the reader are:

1) That "shots" and "shooters" are not the same thing

2) That in terms of alcohol equivalency -- which is a very current public health issue globally, and surfacing in the US -- it is important to understand that all shots and shooters are not created equal

3) That globally, a mL shot-measure is colloquial, not equivalent, and range widely

4) Public health rules seek to standardize and regulate shot-pour measures

5) List and display typical shot beverages, and typical shooter mixes

6) Link to the entry on the shot glass

I've talked with you a little about my aim to approach this category comprehensively. Some reviewers have commented that "on the rocks" is common, known vocabulary. I believe this may not be true, as one example. To that end, I'm wondering if it might be appropriate to create an entry that includes the language of cocktails, with many vocabulary words including "on the rocks." While it is true that enthusiasts understand that "on the rocks" means, a drink poured over ice, I'm not sure that many readers who are new to the category and want to learn about it can find a concise source of this vocabulary. Twist, shake, stir, strain, rocks, up, jigger, shot, Boston shaker, shaker, martini, liqueur or liquor, cordial, bitter, extract, syrup, reduction, double, Tom Collins, tall, short, DOB, flute, rimmed.

Would this be a useful entry and is there a Wikipedia standard for how to approach this kind of lexicon? Sebastian Lake (talk) 20:08, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Try adding things to Index of alcohol-related articles. You could split the index into sections and include the many things that aren't currently listed there. Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:24, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan please respond to this much later when you are not busy. This is a question just for general information: When I began to study the alcohol-related topics, the first Wiki entry I clicked was this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spins This article is clearly a pseudo-entry that is really a spoof, and in many respects, un-funny. There's information that purports to be medical advice that is simply untrue and dangerous. There are a bazillion citations/references but when you drill in, you'll find teenager's blogs, religious quoted out of context, etc. What do you do when you find something like this? And what I don't get is, how do entries like this glide through, but serious content gets ripped to shreds? Sebastian Lake (talk) 01:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What you should do is "rip it to shreds". Any dubious information you find that doesn't have a reliable source or has no source can and should be removed. As for yours, most editors don't have that happen. You probably had a tough break, and the majority of your future articles won't face the same amount of scrutiny. Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Public domain versus trademark laws

The impression I got from Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Releasing logo into the public domain is that even if the logo is released into the public domain, it cannot be used to promote another product if it has a trademark. I am concerned that it doesn't have a trademark though since this says abandoned-failure to respond. If there is a trademark, it should be fine to release; however, the owner of the copyright of the logo should consult with a lawyer to be safe. Ryan Vesey Review me! 22:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ryan. I will query this directly in the morning (Friday AM, EST) and post a reply to you with whatever I learn. I'll find out the TM status, etc. Really appreciate all of your help and guidance on this. Sebastian Lake (talk) 23:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan, checking in about the photos. I recently discovered that, at least while he is using the BarrelProof screen name, this author has written/edited countless for spirits which include photos of bottles with logos clearly visible. I wonder if BarrelProof can clarify the rules, with respect to photos such as the ones he has challenged on the Sweet Revenge entry?

It cannot simply be a matter of the quality of the image, can it? I mean, are obviously amateurish photos okay, while better-composed and focused images are not? Sebastian Lake (talk) 19:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, almost every item with a logo is going to be under copyright. If it is uploaded as a free image, it is incorrect, but it can be uploaded with a fair use rationale. Then it depends on how many instances it appears on the page. They should generally only appear once. As I mentioned on the talk page of Sweet Revenge (liqueur), I'm a bit busy, so if I don't get around to checking them later today, try reminding me again tomorrow. Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, about being busy. Me too. I want to add to Wikipedia and particularly in the categories where I've got some expertise, but I can see now that it requires much more attention-paid to internal processes than in actually generating content. Wow! Anyway, I'm going to try to focus on areas where I can have some impact and avoid the navel-gazing.Sebastian Lake (talk) 20:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Sebastian Lake. You have new messages at Ryan Vesey's talk page.
Message added 13:25, 13 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ryan Vesey Review me! 13:25, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article I would like created if you know anything about it

I'm in the process of adding council resolutions to a spreadsheet and I noticed that the city held a referendum in 1984. "Shall the City of Windom be Authorized to Issue Licenses for Split Liquor?" I went to Wikipedia to learn what Split Liquor was, but there is no Wikipedia page. The full text on the ballot was:

Split Liquor
Currently the City operates and intends to continue to operate a municipal liquor store. Shall the City of Windom, in addition, be authorized to issue private "on-sale" licenses to hotels and restaurants as defined in Minnesota Statuetes 340.353 Subd. 5 & 6?

Is it possible that the term "split liquor" is referring to splitting it into on-sale and off-sale or is it something notable that should be written about? Interestingly, those two links go to an article on UK licensing, does one not exist for US licensing? Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:28, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is Fireball a liqueur?

Hello. The question of whether the "Fireball Cinnamon Whisky" product is a liqueur or not is being discussed at Talk:Fireball (liqueur). If you have an opinion on the matter (regardless of what your opinion might be), I invite you to comment there.

You may find some relevant background information by reviewing these:

The history of a newly-created article
The history of the prior article
User:Ccharters user page and User talk:Ccharters talk page
contribution log of a new user
Talk:Sazerac Company talk page of the company that makes the product.

—BarrelProof (talk) 18:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]