User talk:Tturner2009

Before reverting again, please read the Talk:Kim Schmitz discussion page. --78.34.4.52 (talk) 15:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war in Kim Schmitz

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Regards, HaeB (talk) 03:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are not in any kind of Edit war here. There seems to be other users who are reverting back the content. I have asked already to find a common ground so we can proceed and agree on a final version.Tturner2009 (talk) 03:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was an edit war. It is the very definition of an edit war. Since the article is protected now you have the opportunity to contribute on the talk page. Once again I would like to remind you to read the Wikipedia guidelines Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:No original research. If you have read these non-negotiable policies and have understood that your "revised version" is a gross violation of all three guidelines I am happy to read your contributions on Talk:Kim Schmitz to improve the article.--78.34.4.52 (talk) 14:01, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Wikipedia:Citing sources is a must-read, too. --78.34.4.52 (talk) 15:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for File:How Crime Led to a Wealthy.jpg}

Thank you for uploading File:How Crime Led to a Wealthy.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for File:How Crime Led to a Wealthy.jpg}

Thank you for uploading File:How Crime Led to a Wealthy.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for File:How Crime Led to a Wealthy.jpg}

Thank you for uploading File:How Crime Led to a Wealthy.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Kim Schmitz

Hi, I've responded to the discussion you invited me to - my message is at the bottom of the page. I'm afraid I'm rather busy now, and can't get involved much into your discussion, but I would recommend dropping a line at Wikipedia:Third opinion asking for outside input, as your discussion will get a larger audience over there and others may be able to help. Cheers, tempodivalse [☎] 16:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]