User talk:Ggarvin

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from Stitch 'n Bitch. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Fram 15:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Stitch 'n Bitch, you will be blocked from editing. Fram 15:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

T-shirt image

I have expressed some concerns over the T-shirt image you added to the Stitch 'n Bitch article at Talk:Stitch 'n Bitch#T-Shirt image. I'd like to hear your input on this issue. Lyrl^Talk _C 22:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Logo color.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Logo color.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 19:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sew Fast/Sew Easy article

The company information you added to the Stitch 'n Bitch article is not relevant to the term stitch 'n bitch. It may warrant its own article, but I see that article location has been protected due to violations of Wikipedia's policies.

I'm willing to work with you on making a new version of the Sew Fast Sew Easy article that conforms to Wikipedia's policies, if you'd like. I'd suggest working on the article in your own userspace, first: User:Ggarvin/Sew Fast Sew Easy would work. One important thing to look for is evidence of what Wikipedia defines as notability: significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Any coverage of the business in newspapers, magazines, etc. (that is not advertising by the business itself) counts. The coverage does not need to be online, although many readers prefer online material because it is easier to verify. Once we're happy with the condition of the article, I may have some of the admins that have been involved in the past look it over, or we may take it to WP:Deletion review before going live with it. Lyrl^Talk _C 01:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sew Fast Sew Easy is known in just about every design house and to potential fashion design students in NYC. We have more than 15 years in business with a significant amount of coverage in the press. May I put the content in the ggarvin/sewfastseweasy page for you to review with references? Also, we should not be removed from the Stitch N Bitch article. This brand is a significant portion of our business that has been developed over a ten year period.

Yes, put the content in your userspace page and I'll review it. Most Wikipedia rules do not apply to userspace (any article where the name starts with User:Ggarvin/ ). This space is yours to put whatever you like with very few restrictions. There is no danger of it being changed or deleted without your permission.

I agree that not all mention of Sew Fast Sew Easy should be removed from the Stitch 'n Bitch article. We disagree on the amount of content that should be included, but I think that is something we can work out. If you bring it up at Talk:Stitch 'n Bitch, that gives other interested editors the opportunity to provide input, also. Lyrl^Talk _C 23:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to let you know I had left some comments at User talk:Ggarvin/sew fast sew easy. Lyrl^Talk _C 23:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion requested

I've requested a third opinion on our disagreement over image use. Lyrl^Talk _C 03:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citing sources

Wikipedia is copyrighted under the GFDL. This license allows individuals or companies to copy Wikipedia articles and use them any way they see fit, as long as they give credit to Wikipedia authors. Wikipedia itself has projects to distribute articles on CDs. Only the articles are copied in these cases, so the articles have to be able to stand alone. Treating the Sew Fast Sew Easy press page as an addendum to the Wikipedia article won't work - that page would not be copied in any use of Wikipedia articles. So the references have to be included in the Wikipedia article itself.

It is preferable to cite the sources directly rather than merely refer to the Sew Fast Sew Easy press page because the direct sources are considered more reliable and thus make the article higher quality by Wikipedia standards. Lyrl^Talk _C 02:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While it is preferable to cite sources directly rather that merely refer to the company press page because the direct sources are more reliable, how can you evaluate the reliability of books if there is no reference available or if a book is out of print. Then there is nothing to solidify a claim, correct? Not all things are available on the web. What should I give as a refences then? Issue number, article content? How will you verify these items that need citation if the press page is inadequate?

Additionally, the company is not in a legal dispute over the name. The fact of the matter is we own a registered trademark and have an application in for a second trademark. If you used a product similar to or like Disney or Warner Brothers, there would be no legal dispute but it would be said that the company acted to protect its rights as an owner. We are not in a legal dispute. We own our trademark. Debbie Stoller iniated legal proceedings against Sew Fast Sew Easy because she was denied. We are diligently working with Ms Stoller and her attorneys to explore ways we can resolve this action. Therefore, if this statement is NECESSARY for the content of the article, it should read - Sew Fast Sew Easy took action to prevent dilution of its registered trademark, or something closer to that statement. that is a fact and not a swayed statement.

Conflict of interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
and you must always:
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you. Victoriagirl (talk) 19:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the article is written in a neutral point of view and was previously removed because it read like an advertisement. This article with the timeline was approved by several administrators. None of the content is made to read like an advertisement. I have only added releases of products to the market as they take place and added additional reasons why this article and the company are notable.

I have not violated wikipedia rules. Again, this article was approved by several administrators for being non partial.--Ggarvin (talk) 21:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Sew Fast Sew Easy

I have nominated Sew Fast Sew Easy, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sew Fast Sew Easy. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Toddst1 (talk) 15:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SFSE_Ad_-_May_2007_-_the_L.pdf listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:SFSE_Ad_-_May_2007_-_the_L.pdf, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? MER-C 12:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:L-mag ad.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:L-mag ad.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 07:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Logo color.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Logo color.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- Skier Dude ► 04:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sew Fast Sew Easy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sew Fast Sew Easy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sew Fast Sew Easy (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Blue Riband► 15:43, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Stitchandbitch bag.jpg

The file File:Stitchandbitch bag.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Stitchnbitch i.jpg

The file File:Stitchnbitch i.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned with questionable licensing

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 19:12, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]