Talk:Fred Seibert

message: :Image:Seibert.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Seibert.JPG

message: Is it just me or does this read like a resume? I almost wonder if it was copy-pasted directly from Fred Seibert's web site, but I don't have time to investigate right now. 108.20.37.44 (talk) Eris Discord | Talk 14:20, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You were right, Eris: I've cleared out a bit of the worst of the crap. This still reeks of promotion, although I think I got all the appearances of "legendary" out. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Like a resume 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fred Seibert. 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:
*Added  tag to http://www.ask.com/question/what-a-cartoon-show
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101203060916/http://gigaom.com/video/next-new-networks-nears-1b-views-profitability/ to http://gigaom.com/video/next-new-networks-nears-1b-views-profitability/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090828044937/http://mag.awn.com/index.php?article_no=1800. to http://mag.awn.com/index.php?article_no=1800.
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:51, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I saw that this was brought up in 2013 and seemingly fixed at one point, but the article as it stands today still seems like it’s written to be promotional, with basically every section reading like parts of a resume. I’m not an experienced editor so I don’t know what would be the proper way to go about fixing the article’s issues (if other editors agree the issues even exist), but I thought I’d bring it up nonetheless. 71.199.134.138 (talk) 10:50, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article still feels like a resume / promotion