Talk:The MySpace Movie

message: Current Debate: This article lacks importance.
Author Edit: "This article's importance is set to demonstrate the phenomenon of MySpace and how its             creation induced publicity of the site itself."
This needs a a spell check run on it. Some improvements in its grammer woudl be appropriate, too.
<P>
AUTHOR EDIT: "Spell check is fine. You should watch your spelling yourself!"
</p>
Performed necessary grammatical and orthographical cleanup.  Added categories. --Polylerus 20:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: importance

message: Why are some but not all chapter titles in quotations? I've removed them, for uniformity, since it appears they're unjustified; I may be wrong. FAL 06:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotation marks 

message: :Image:Myspacemoviewebad.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Myspacemoviewebad.jpg

message: :Image:Vendettastudios.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Vendettastudios.JPG

message: In September, the "Publicity" section underwent a major edit by an anon.  It has earmarks of somebody trying to push their point of view using WP; in particular, there's the note that "(If eggtea could link to the email from his inbox then it would be here as a reference.)".  (The entire section is about a user eggtea has been stripped of his due.)  It looks like this section was written by eggtea himself.  It's full of citations pointing back to this same article; the only citation that doesn't is when he cites the Google purchase date.  I'm all in favor of reverting that section to its pre-September mode, but since it's been in the article so long I wanted to make sure I'm not missing something.  -- Piquan (talk) 11:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publicity is a mess