Jump to content

Talk:Time (magazine): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
 
(325 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Update|reason=Recent changes in editorial coverage and seriousness of purpose are not included at all|date=September 2021}}
<i> In the 1930s, Luce felt strongly that America was not doing enough to arm itself for another World War, that Franklin Roosevelt was doing a shameful job avoiding his duty.</i>
{{American English}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Magazines |importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Journalism|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Politics |importance=High|American=yes|American-importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Media|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject United States |importance=Mid}}
}}
{{OnThisDay|date1=2004-03-02|oldid1=2647599|date2=2005-03-03|oldid2=16334925}}


:This seems to me to be rather out of place and unrelated to anything around it, so I'm removing it. -- [[User:Bdesham|bdesham]]


<hr>


So... from 1941 to 1987, nothing happened at Time (magazine); THAT'S flabbergasting, isn't it? B-class article or Z-class article, that's the question! <span style="font-family: Times; size: small">[[User:Alainr345|<i style="color: #4590ff">AlainR345</i>]][[User talk:Alainr345|<sup style="color: #ffb000">Techno-Wiki-Geek</sup>]]</span> 03:09, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
Since the name of the magazine is "Time," shouldn't this article be titled "[[Time (magazine)]]" ? -- [[User:Isis|isis]] 10:06 Dec 13, 2002 (UTC)


== "[[:Time (Magazine)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
:Actually, the magazine is called '''TIME magazine''', but I don't know if the wikipedia naming convention allows for naming it that here. [[User:Kingturtle|Kingturtle]] 17:31 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
-------
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.chped.com/w/index.php?title=Time_(Magazine)&redirect=no Time (Magazine)]</span> has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|redirects for discussion]] to determine whether its use and function meets the [[Wikipedia:Redirect|redirect guidelines]]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 21#Time (Magazine)}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> [[User:Nickps|Nickps]] ([[User talk:Nickps|talk]]) 22:15, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Regarding the cover picture, it is a copyrighted material for sure but isn't it a fair use? -- [[User:TakuyaMurata|Taku]] 18:04 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)


== Move citations into refs? ==
:1) Fair use is a more restrictive policy than the GFDL; in other words, it goes against the purpose of using the GFDL, which is to let anyone reuse Wikipedia content as they see fir (as long as they allow redistribution).
:2) It's a defense, not a presumptive right--that is, AOL Time Warner could get an injunction on Wikipedia for having use the images, and we'd have to take them down whether or not we went to court to defend our use of the image.
:So fair use is generally not a good idea, especially when it comes to things like full-size copies of TIME Magazine covers, which probably wouldn't be defensible under fair use doctrine even if we tried to use that defense in court. --[[User:The Cunctator|The Cunctator]]


There are multiple places where the article says, "According to Book X, blah...". Would someone like to move those into refs with proper citations (including authors, publisher, isbn numbers, etc)? -- [[User:Gnuish|Gnuish]] ([[User talk:Gnuish|talk]]) 14:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
:You think fiar use is not a good idea and you have a right to insist it, but it is not our agreement at all. The picture used under fair use is not covered by GFDL. And I know some people, particulary Larry back that we should avoid possible legal suits as much as possible. They have a point but it is not a settled agreement either. -- [[User:TakuyaMurata|Taku]] 18:14 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)


== missing my package ==
Ask yourself, is the image VITAL to this article? No. So let's play safe. :-) -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]] 18:17 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)


Tumu delivered 4/18 /24, I didn't get the package TRACK # IzGG760YW71694317, PLEASE RESPONSE ME I CALLED USPS NO ANSWE [[Special:Contributions/40.135.124.221|40.135.124.221]] ([[User talk:40.135.124.221|talk]]) 07:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Not it is not, but then you think we shouldn't put a cover picture for movies or albums? We can remove pictures always after copyright-holders started to complain. Let's stop copyright paranoia. -- [[User:TakuyaMurata|Taku]] 18:28 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)

:It's not copyright paranoia to avoid sticking copyrighted images all over Wikipedia. It's respect for users of Wikipedia. Including copyrighted images and calling it "fair use" prevents (or at least places unfair burdens on) people using Wikipedia content for commercial purposes, which we otherwise allow. And there's a ''big'' difference between a thumbnail image and a full-size copy. You'd have had much better luck if you had put in a itty-bitty Time magazine cover. --[[User:The Cunctator|The Cunctator]] 18:56 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)

::There you go - it is now 200 px wide. --[[User:Maveric149|mav]] 19:20 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)

:Thanks Mav and sorry about the size. I don't have a decent tool to resize the picture. It is preferable in wikipedia that people cooraborate rather than speak out responsibility. Actually I am little confused what is your opinion. It seems there three ones now:
* Fair use should not be applied in wikipedia
* Imagies with fair use should be only used for vital purpose
* Imagies with fair use should be used with decent picture size.
Which one? Anyway, at least to my knowledge there is no policy to ban uploading imagines under fair use. Of course, we can discuss any time we should put a picture or not but sysops should not act based on their belief but on consensus. -- [[User:TakuyaMurata|Taku]] 19:39 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 07:48, 29 April 2024


So... from 1941 to 1987, nothing happened at Time (magazine); THAT'S flabbergasting, isn't it? B-class article or Z-class article, that's the question! AlainR345Techno-Wiki-Geek 03:09, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Time (Magazine)" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect Time (Magazine) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 21 § Time (Magazine) until a consensus is reached. Nickps (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move citations into refs?[edit]

There are multiple places where the article says, "According to Book X, blah...". Would someone like to move those into refs with proper citations (including authors, publisher, isbn numbers, etc)? -- Gnuish (talk) 14:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

missing my package[edit]

Tumu delivered 4/18 /24, I didn't get the package TRACK # IzGG760YW71694317, PLEASE RESPONSE ME I CALLED USPS NO ANSWE 40.135.124.221 (talk) 07:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.chped.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Time_(magazine)&oldid=1221327849"