User talk:SunroofGuy

Sunroof

Hello! I just wanted to clarify my recent edits to the sunroof article. First, thanks for the contribution. Second, I removed the capital letters, since the bold type and italics should be enough focus - we don't normally use all capital spelling here. I also felt that the text was fine as it stands, and did not need the clarification of what an automobile is or the verbose descriptions. Please don't take offense at these edits - I really do appreciate the expansion of this article. --SFoskett 11:00, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Skyroof

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Skyroof, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Skyroof. B. Wolterding (talk) 16:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have listed skyroof at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skyroof. —Lowellian (reply) 21:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHY was my User Page Blanked?

A rough user page outlining and establishing verifiable industry credentials for SunroofGuy was posted in late 2007, after a Fake 'expert' scandal forced Wikipedia to review their editor policy and require establishing and posting such credentials. I complied.

Suddenly, after some controversey related to an article I posted, admin TenPoundHammer blanked the entire content, stating wikipedia is not a webhost. I don't understand.

Expertise on the subject of automotive aftermarket accessories and sunroofs is verifiably demonstrated by outlining my 25 years of industry experience though employment, involvement and status as a regular contributing author in numerous publications. How is that inappropriate content?

--M.L. SunroofGuy 19:45, 9 December 2008

Blocked for Legal Threats

If you wish to dispute the closure of a deletion debate, deletion review is the proper venue.

Wikipedia is not infringing upon the trademark. Trademark infringement does not occur from the simple use of a term. Wikipedia does not sell sunroofs or in any other way engage in services or the selling of goods covered by the trademark. It is no different than the case of Coca-Cola which is also a trademark.

If you have a content dispute, you need to follow the dispute resolution policy.

Wikipedia has a strict no legal threats policy. As your recent posts contain a perceived legal threat, I have blocked your account. If you clearly state here that you have no intention in engaging in legal actions, the block will be lifted. If you continue to engage in such threats, you will remain blocked indefinitely.

Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to JLaTondre on Acct Block

There are 2 issues, one is the deletion debate, the other is the Redir.

My apologies for not posting to the appropriate forums for dispute resolution, as I've not spent appropriate time learning the Wiki protocols. I quickly posted to related persons talk pages in an effort to correct the problem and reference why we have a concern. This appears to be the method suggested in NLT policy.

I fully understand the legal aspects of tradmark infringement, and respect that Wiki doesn't market/sell product, therefore it can't directly infringe trademarks. Wiki should be expected to apply the same level of fair use guidelines to trademarks as is expected of the media.

My company is concerned about the promotion of confusion which leads to infringement created by the Redir.

Allowing an inappropriate/incorrect Redir to persist after the trademark owner protested could potentially be cited for contributing to resultant trademark infringement, as Wiki is percieved to be an authoritative, accurate and factual information resource. This issue has much broader implications than our protest.

DONMAR is NOT threatening to engage Wiki in legal action. We merely ask that our trademark rights be respected, and suggest that Wiki admins should show concern for trademark IP as they do for copyright.

Just as Coke® is a brand of soft drink, Skyroof® is a brand of automotive sunroof (and architectural roof system). Neither name should be used generically to represent the product category. Wiki should not promote incorrect use through inappropriate references or redir links, especially after the trademark owner protests.

How do you suggest Wiki resolve our specific issue, as well as the broader aspects of potentially contributing to and promoting trademark infringement by individuals and businesses who use wiki as a resource for accurate and truthful information?

Stwalkerster was kind enough to direct me to numerous useful resources, which I have been working my way through.

I hope this matter can be appropriately addressed both for our concerns, and in the interest of improving Wiki.

Thanks for your patience and understanding.

--M.L. SunroofGuy 19:15, 9 December 2008

I will unblock based upon your statement above. Please tone down the legal statements in the future or you are likely to find yourself blocked again.

Wikipedia does respect trademark issues. However, the proper approach is to discuss the issues via the dispute resolution process and not engage in demands or hyperbole.

However, in the spirit of conciliation, I have gone ahead and deleted the redirect. I have left the page protection in place as consensus is clearly that the term is non-notable in its own right and does not merit an article.

I suggest you become more familiar with our policies and guidelines. In particular, I recommend you read the following:

Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for permanently protecting our SKYROOF trademark from inappropriate Redir. I supsect 25 years of printed trade industry resources won't help establish wiki notability. Our brand is not a household name consumer product, though it is well known among professional sunroof installers [aftermarket], and car companies who inappropriatly used our mark. I believe Kalwall would say the same about their 40 year old brand with respect to archtects and commercial builders. DONMAR will not abandon efforts to promote and ensure the uniqueness of our SKYROOF brand everywhere possible, however, we respect that the final decision has been made regarding a Wikipedia listing. Thank you for your understanding and assistance.

-- M.L. SunroofGuy 12:30, 10 December 2008

Skyroof listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Skyroof. Since you had some involvement with the Skyroof redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:SkyroofLS.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:SkyroofLS.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. matt br 17:21, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]