Fionamcgowan

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Fionamcgowan, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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! -- Avi (talk) 18:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Andrew Regan

Please leave the other version of the recoveries as well as the text. This article has been the subject of a detailed m:OTRS discussion, and furthermore, The Guardian's version of the recoveries is outdated, especially per more recent information. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 18:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I will ask you one last time to please stop adding the out-of-date 4M pound reference as well as other information from the Guardian article. This article has been reviewed by the m:OTRS team for WP:BLP issues, and the way it is structured now is accurate, up-to-date, neutral, and approved by the m:OTRS team. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 16:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Fiona. Thank you for dropping me a note. Regan's solicitors have contacted the Wikimedia foundation. While correspondence with them is both private and not usable as a reference, they have stated that number Regan received is closer to 2M pounds than 4M pounds. As such, the decision was made to maintain that value as opposed to the Guardian value. -- Avi (talk) 01:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Fiona. The suggested text you posted on my talk page is very similar to the way the article was before the solicitors for Mr. Regan contacted the Wikimedia foundation with certain valid claims. The current text was reviewed by the volunteers at m:OTRS and was deemed both accurate as well as free of the connotations and innuendos that bothered Mr. Regan's representatives, which is why, I do not think that the version you posted would be acceptable for the article. In cases of WP:BLP we have to take extreme care to ensure that information is neutral in both the denotation and connotation. Sorry, and thanks. -- Avi (talk) 02:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Fiona. This is the test you suggested:

In 1997 Regan led an attempt to gain control of the CWS in a £1.2 billion take-over bid but the bid was rejected. As part of its bid defence CWS suggested that Regan had acted inappropriately and this led to him being accused of theft and the opening of an official investigation by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). At his trial in 2003 Regan was acquitted and was awarded his defence costs reported to be £2 million.

This is the text that is there:

In 1997 Regan led an attempt, to gain control of the CWS in a £1.2 billion take-over bid which was rejected. In the early months of 1997, CWS performed an internal investigation into the activities of two senior CWS executives and their dealings with Regan. These executives were subsequently dismissed by CWS. In April of 1997, an official investigation by the was opened by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) into the 1994 contract and the 1995 extension. This investigation led to a 2001 trial in which of Regan was charged with the theft of £2.4 million from Hobson Plc subsidiary FE Barber Ltd, the two CWS executives were charged with corruptly accepting £1 million each, and a Hobson Plc solicitor was charged with aiding and abetting corruption. The CWS executives were convicted and sentenced to 42 months” imprisonment and were ordered to pay £50,000 costs to the SFO; the solicitor was acquitted. The jury failed to arrive at a verdict on Regan, and a retrial was ordered by HHJ David Radford. Regan was acquitted at his retrial, and was awarded defence costs which could be as much as £2m.

I believe that part of Regan's solicitors' point was that without the statement that others were found guilty, it would undercut the finding of Regan's innocence. However, the other executives were specifically not named, as this is not the article about the executives. However, I see that perhaps the SFO's accusation of theft is not clear in the article, and I will try to add it in a neutral fashion. Thank you for pointing that out. -- Avi (talk) 15:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Fiona. Sorry about the delay. The text that is there now strictly conforms to wikipedia policy and guideline. Please send me the text you want to post instead, highlighting the differences if possible. Thanks! -- Avi (talk) 15:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I will bring this up on the OTRS message system and get some more feedback. Thank you for your patience. -- Avi (talk) 03:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

After discussion with some other volunteers, I have substituted a slightly modified version of your text in the sensitive spot. It is possible that it may need to be adjusted again if Regan's solicitors re-contact us with specific issues, but we believe that as it stands now it is fair and accurate. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 16:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Corvus Capital

Hello. The Andrew Regan article should be about Andrew Regan, not Corvus Capital. Please see Talk:Andrew Regan and than you for your patience. -- Avi (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image removal Andrew Regan

Hi Melesse, you have removed an image from the Andrew Regan wikipeida page on June 21. Can you please explain why and why it has been deleted all together as we had rights to use the iamge.

Thanks Fionamcgowan (talk) 13:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair use images of living people are not allowed because it's reasonable for someone to go take a photo of them and release it under a free license. If you did have rights to use it, then you should have marked it with the proper license, not fair use. Melesse (talk) 23:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

finally.......

Hi Fiona,

It's Howard in NY.....I've been trying to track you down for a few years and finally found you. Since this is a public message board, I'll try to send a private email. Just in case it dosen't work, my email address is haroyal@yahoo.

To verify your ID, please tell me where we met.

Ciao

14:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Concept Ice Vehicle FR Satic HighR.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Concept Ice Vehicle FR Satic HighR.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 12:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of Aleksandra Melnichenko for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aleksandra Melnichenko is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aleksandra Melnichenko until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article..Jeff5102 (talk) 11:28, 23 March 2012 (UTC)