Jump to content

Talk:Great Cats World Park

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

References

[edit]

More refs: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] - Peregrine Fisher 04:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More: [9], [10], - Peregrine Fisher 16:09, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply] 

:[11] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 23:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from Katr67's talk page

[edit]

Hello,

I have a concern about an article I found on Wikipedia regarding my company Great Cats World Park. I was wondering what I need to do to have the article US Fish and Wildlife Service probation removed.

The articles referenced are from The Daily Triplicate. I would also like to know if the newspaper gave permission to post these articles or if they were posted illegally.

My reasons for having the articles removed are because they are biased and reflect a negative image of my company. Under court order I was not allowed to tell my side of the story about the fine and the facts of the case are much different than what was written in the newspaper article.

Any help you can give me on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

Craig Wagner Director Great Cats World Park http://www.greatcatsworldpark.com info@greatcatsworldpark.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.32.168.35 (talk) 21:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for contacting me. I moved the discussion so other editors can weigh in and not overwhelm my talk page. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it is going to include both positive and negative information about the subjects of articles, as long as that information is worded from a neutral point-of-view. The paragraph about the probation appears to fit this criterion. Permission is not needed to post urls to articles posted on the web. It would only be a problem if the information was copied verbatim, in which case it would be a copyright violation. I'm sorry you feel the news articles cited in this article are biased. The only thing I can think of is to find citations from reliable sources that can show an alternate point of view. I've asked some other editors to have a look at this discussion, since this is a sensitive situation. I hope this helps. Katr67 22:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was the editor who created this page and added the probation information. I'm actually a fan of Cave Junction and its attractions, including yours. Basically the way I created this page was I thought your park was cool, and wanted to create a page for it. I did a google search for newspaper articles about the park, which is when I learned of the Daily Triplicate articles. I was trying to create the most comprehensive article I could on your park, so I summarized every newspaper artilce I found. This is how pages are (ideally) created on wikipedia. This is to prevent editors from influencing articles with their own opinion. We only retell facts found in reliable sources like newspapers and magazines. It doesn't sound to me like you really did a bad thing, but the only information I can include is what I find in the newspapers. If your under court order, it sounds like there won't be any new information forthcoming, which is unfortunate, because I'd love to include it. To minimize bias, I included the quote where the Fish and Wildlife agent said that your park was the best place for the ocelot. The only other info the articles had was dates and fine information, and a little about the selling of ocelots. If you know of any other articles that show you in a better light, or that have information that you would like me to include, I would be glad to. Even though I created this article, I don't own it, so it isn't really appropriate for me to modify based on an editor's opinions, including my own and yours. If it's any consolation, I beefed up the Cave Junction, Oregon page a bunch, and it now mentions the park (and not the probation). I imagine that page is viewed maybe 100 times a day, so the profile of your park will probably be raised quite a bit. I hate to say there's no such thing as bad publicity, but that may be the best way to look at. Again, if I left out any positive info about your park that's in any of those artilces, I would be happy to include it. - Peregrine Fisher 23:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like your main issue is with the newspaper, I would suggest starting there for any remedy. If they publish a correction, then that info could be included. Otherwise only information from reliable sources can be posted, and then all information is fair game to be included, whether it puts someone in a negative light or not. We simply do not censor content because of its view, only for truth as verifiable from published reliable sources. As to posting the newspaper story, unless it was copied verbatum there would be no copyright violation. Otherwise a newspaper (or anyone) cannot copyright the facts of a story, only the exact way in which it is presented, with quotes allowed under the fair use doctrine when properly attributed. Hope that helps. Aboutmovies 02:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Great Cats World Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Great Cats World Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:59, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Great_Cats_World_Park&oldid=1207410439"