JSDA

please reply here. I was perfectly fine with waycross, stuff in one section and lansing in other, util you start adding lansing to waycross, and even deleting waycross, once that happens, then so to the autobiography stuff per wiki standards also has to be removed, I have always added to Burt's page, but if you and dalbury want to get picky, then his page needs to be reverted to the way it was about 5 months ago, NO autobiography references because they are not up to standards (but i chose not to get rid of them), but only stuff viewable from the web. and truly available to most of wiki users, his book comes no where close to meetings the standards. So we have a predicament, leave both, or delete both, because according to dalbury and the policy he posted, neither meet the requirements. I am all for the truce that was on his page long before you came along. I have in fact if you look back over time did a ton of work for his page, creating section after section, and making the page better viewable. My suggestion as before is to leave it neutral, but you and dalbury, deleting waycross stuff, or trying to add lansing stuff to waycross stuff is not neutral, Not only that but you need to check some of the sources you are trying to use, that nnbd thing you keep trying to use off hiughbeam is NOT an interview with BURT, it is an interview ABOUT BURT. Pay for the service you will see that.Rogue Gremlin 18:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• I wasn't trying to use NNBD as anything other than a website listing Burt's birthplace. I'm all for a neutrality on the article page. Thats the way it should be. The debate can continue on the discussion page for all I care. The challenge is, we seem to have differing opinions on what 'neutral' is. As I've been saying, whats wrong with just dropping ANY reference to Waycross or Lansing on the article page and just having the note next to "Birthplace Disputed" say "There is a great deal of debate as to whether Burt was born in Wacross, GA or Lansing, MI (see discussion page for more information)". Thats as neutral as it gets. Heck, I even gave Waycross first billing in there. Ha! JSDA 18:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm ok with removing all georgia and michigan references, but you do realize the only reason dalbury added all the autobiography stuff was to put michigan EVERYWHERE , which even though it was not a book ready accessible by the masses i left alone, So if you go through the page and remove every georgia and michigan refernce to his childhood i'll leave it alone as long as it is EVERY, i personally thought all the stuff on his early childhood and is not neccesary, but i left it alone, I think all that stuff should be removed ALL of it, stuff bought who he met, and all that rubbish, I think it should be about his life leading up to his acting career (COLLEGE and forward and everything since) not all that other dribble. Just (the man, the myth, the legend) not that as a child he took a dump in his potty on a michigan street and not all the stuff bout his family, father in war and such, because it is not a page about his father it is a page about Burt,Rogue Gremlin 18:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a messenger such as yahoo, msn, or so on, so we can discuss things further? without waiting on this thing to update?Because all i want is the man to have one of the best pages on hereRogue Gremlin 18:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• I'm OK with the page sitting as it is right now, or with no mention of Waycross or Lansing (except for a reference to the discussion page regarding the dispute about his birthplace). I can't speak for Dalbury or Lugnut on that though. I don't have an instant messenger any longer. I deleted because I found I was getting way less work done when I had it installed. JSDA 20:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

You say you agree with me, and yet it all over the early-life section, it just tries to paint a picture of him being from Michigan. Once ALL refernces are removed, then to shall the Waycross. Most of that early-life stuff anyway isn't really about Burt, but about his family. Stuf you don't see on any other page on this site.Rogue Gremlin 20:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• • • • I've deleted anything I've added relating to his birthplace (outside of the notes section regarding the birthplace dispute). I'm assuming you're referring to the Merrit, MI info, etc that is still in the Early Life section? If so, to me that section now implies (of all things) that he was from the Ozarks (i.e. thats where his earliest memories are from). The remaining information regarding Michigan seems to refer to this being where his parents were from (which you've acknowledged). It doesn't say or even imply that its where Burt was from. JSDA 20:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
        • so then i suppose you didnt see this""Burt was born to Burton Reynolds, of half-Cherokee Indian[5] descent, and Fern, who was of Italian[6] descent. Burt Junior, his mother and his sister joined Burt Senior at Fort Leonard Wood, where they lived for two years. Burt Junior has stated that his first memories are of playing in the Ozark woods at Fort Leonard Wood. When Burt Senior was sent to Europe, the family returned to Lansing, Michigan."" which reads like, he was born in lansing moved to ozark woods, then the family returned to lansing.Rogue Gremlin 23:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• go ahead remove it, i will add it right back, until ALL refernces in early-life are removed. you say you agree, that both should be removed, but you only try to revert georgia stuff and yet michigan is all over the EARLY-LIFE section. Also what i have added is refernced(verifiable) were as the early life section does not meet requirements and is also a copyvio so I am going to check back in a sec to see if the entire early-life section has been editted. If not then the stuff on georgia that i add is VALID by wiki rulesRogue Gremlin 20:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• • I didn't deny that what you added was a valid source, I said that we could add valid sources that say Lansing as well. I didn't do that because it would just make things messier than they already are. The debate should be on the discussion page, not the article page. JSDA 20:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• • • Funny thing is, you say you removed what you placed, and you don't want to remove someone else's stuff( but you have no problem removing someone else's stuff as long as it says waycross, what you are saying is you won't remove someone else's stuff that say lansing, but you have no problem removing someone else's statements that you don't agree with. This debate has been going on long before you came here. And was resolved until you try to remove other work). So if you don't have a problem removing mine and other people's source's of waycross, then you should have NO problem removing someone else's work that says Lansing. Furthermore what i have placed in (mini-bio is no different than the stuff in early life) I do not mention birthplace only that he lived there as a child same as early-life does not although early life does say he was born to his parents then goes on to mention lansing after that, inferring that he was born there.Rogue Gremlin 23:22, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• • • • Well, par usual, we disagree. I think your Waycross addition is a clear attempt to make it appear he was born in Waycross. Thats why I took it out. At any rate, check the discussion page. It appears everybody is now in agreement that any reference (outside of the Disputed Birthplace note) should be removed...so no references to Waycross or Lansing. I'll let you make the edit, and I'll note the agreement between all on the discussion page. JSDA 02:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• • • • • Note: On Dec. 20th, 2007 Rogue Gremlin (obviously him, even though he's been banned and is now posting from a different IP address), changes Burt's birthplace again to disputed, citing "only because people like you not honoring the agreement per talk pages, One to which you agreed with" Here he is referring to us agreeing to leave the birthplace as 'disputed'. That was the case until someone came to discussion page and deleted all of the background discussion on Burt's birthplace (even though the article page refers to the discussion page for more info). This person used the reasoning that Burt's Official site states he's from Michigan, so the subject is closed (which obviously Rogue still disagrees with). I stated that if all the background info is erased from the discussion page, and the discussion is 'closed', then his birthplace should be listed as Lansing, closing the loop. Not surprisingly, Rogue disagrees with this, so now we're back to changing the birthplace on the article page. I continue to have no problem with the birthplace being listed as disputed, as long as the background info is left on the discussion page. I just wanted to answer the accusation from Rogue where he refers to my talk page on the Burt Reynolds article page.

3RR violation on Burt Reynolds

You have violated the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule by making the same revert four times within the previous 24 hours, i.e: here, here, here, here and here. If you make one more revert of this material within the next 17 hours, I will report you to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR, and you will likely be blocked for a while. -- Donald Albury 02:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Well, once again I learn something new. Didn't realize there was such a thing. I'm glad there is though, seems like a good idea. I was starting to think I was going to have to keep editing daily till the day I died. JSDA 05:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• • See also Wikipedia:Edit war. Edit warring is always a bad thing, even when I engage in it. -- Donald Albury 11:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Felix Watts.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Felix Watts.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 21:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --ARTEST4ECHO ^{(talk | contribs)} 21:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)