Please don't take my editorial comment the wrong way: you are entitled to adopt any username you wish, as long as doesn't confuse people. My note ("...not the real Rachel Corrie") is intended to prevent such confusion and thus guarantee your right to participate in building this encyclopedia.
I'm actually interested in reading more about Ms. Corrie's motivation for her self-sacrificial act, and I'm intrigued with the timing of it -- coming on the heels of Bush's ultimatum to Saddam. Is there a link there?
Anyway, remember that we try to write our article from the neutral point of view and that other contributors (like me, perhaps) will want to balance the Rachel Corrie article with some pro-Israeli info. None of the anti-Israeli info should come out, I think. I'd just like to see some other POV than that Israel goes around bulldozing civilian houses at random and deliberately killing women and children. --Uncle Ed 17:43 Mar 18, 2003 (UTC)
Hi "RachelCorrie". We do have a policy on wikipedia:no offensive usernames, and I have to say that posting using the username of a dead person is the sort of thing that the community here might consider offensive. After all, as one Wikipedian said, "your username is not a forum to tweak people's tails". Death is a serious subject, and I personally do not like to see it being trivialised, which I'm afraid is how I feel about your username.
I'd like to ask you to change your username to something that is potentially less offensive. This isn't a threat or an order - I'd just be grateful if you'd respect my feelings on this and try picking something else. Up to you, though - it's just a suggestion.
On a seperate note, I'd be delighted if you could make an encyclopedia article at Rachel Corrie. After all, we have pages for some of the victims of nine-eleven, so I think it'd be entirely reasonable to have a page for a casualty in the Israel-Palestine conflict, particularly if they're newsworthy, as Rachel seems to be. Thanks. :) Martin
Oh, and one more thing. While I wouldn't consider your post "I find you very cute" on RK's page offensive, it seems like you and he have got off on the wrong foot. Perhaps you two could kind of avoid each other for a while? :) Martin
(similar question on user talk:Susan Mason) Hi again! Regarding the photos of Rachel Corrie - you've said on a couple that "Josh has agreed to allow its use". That's great, but it's a little vague. I'm guessing that Josh is the person who took the photo - could you confirm that? Also, do you happen to know his surname, so we can give him a full credit? Thanks, and thanks to Josh for agreeing to license his photos under the GFDL :) Martin
- User:RachelCorrie Yet more of the Rachel industry on wiki. This time, it is an "anonymous user" we are told. This page should be deleted because
- it is in extremely bad taste to name a user page after a recently dead person and so have a dead person's name potentially cropping up all over wiki as a 'contributor';
- their user contributions give no indication whatsoever that this is a valid anonymous user. Its contributions are all devoted to loading and moving images of the real Rachel Corrie around the place. Specifically piles of Rachel images plonked on the "anonymous" user's page, producing yet another wiki shrine to Corrie. This is becoming a sick joke in very poor taste and blatently POV
- If this is a genuine user, they should be instructed to immediately change the name of the page. Using a recently dead person's name whether as a joke or as propaganda is so outside the bounds of acceptable behaviour it beggars belief. ÉÍREman 02:35 Apr 17, 2003 (UTC)
- Is this a request for user:RachelCorrie to be banned? btw, user:RachelCorrie made a number of edits on 18 March, but hasn't edited anything since. If the name is considered a violation of wikipedia:no offensive usernames, we should pick a new name and move content there. see user:TMC for an example of how we've done this in the past. Martin
Image copyright problem with Image:RachelFarRight.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:RachelFarRight.jpeg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 19:00, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Fair use disputed for Image:RachelBurnsFlag.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:RachelBurnsFlag.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Liftarn 16:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)