User talk:Jmarlowe

License tagging for Image:HRO Square.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:HRO Square.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Holme Roberts & Owen[edit]

Hello! First of all, welcome to Wikipedia! We thank you for your contributions. However, we strive to provide the most comprehensive, accurate, and neutral articles possible; in addition, all topics must also fit our inclusion criteria. Your contributions to the article Holme Roberts & Owen, unfortunately, were not as neutral in tone as possible. Our goal is to write a factual and nonbiased article, not to provide advertising for this particular law firm. Thus, I've reverted your changes, as some of those phrases were not neutral and the reworded version still contained all of the relevant information. As to why some of the other articles may have some of this: we're still a work in progress, and we can't guarantee that all of our articles are of the highest quality yet. I will, though, take a look at the articles you cited and edit them so that they conform to our policies.

In addition, I also note that you edited the article HRO. I understand that both the Harvard Radcliffe Orchestra and this law firm have the same abbreviations. However, because the predominant use of the abbreviation is for the orchestra, the nation's oldest, the page HRO should redirect there, per our manual of style. You'll notice, though, on top of the article Harvard Radcliffe Orchestra that there is a disambiguation note pointing people to Holme Roberts & Owen if they came from the HRO redirect page. Thus, both terms are still served by the HRO redirect.

Finally, just a tip about Wikipedia: when leaving notes on user talk pages (like you did to mine) or the talk pages of articles, you can automatically leave your signature by typing four tildes (~~~~). This produces a link to your user page as well as the current timestamp, in UTC, and serves as your "signature". This is a Wikipedia standard, and I would encourage you to do so when leaving comments on talk pages.

I hope I've explained everything clearly. Once again, welcome to Wikipedia, and please don't hesitate to ask me if you have any further questions. Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply! I definitely understand how you feel, but rest assured that we strive to make all of our articles neutral, factual, and informative. Please let me know if you disagree with the current state of the article Holme Roberts & Owen.

Also, thanks for letting me know about the abbreviation HRO. Per your suggestion, I'll change the article HRO into a disambiguation page with the appropriate links; it's pretty much what you did before. However, I do want to point out that simply because an organization has the legal trademark for a certain abbreviation doesn't mean that the abbreviation should automatically redirect there; the purpose of either a disambiguation page or redirect is to link readers to the most encyclopedic topic commonly associated with that, and in some cases it will not be the organization or association which has the legal trademark of that association.

Thanks again! Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:41, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:HRO Square (Small).jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:HRO Square (Small).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]