Talk:Connecticut v. Amero

message: I wonder if this image could be added under a fair use rationale: 
http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070213/070213_teacherporn_hmed_12p.h2.jpg
Image shows Amero w/ husband Wes Volle, cf. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17134607/
What do people think?
86.56.48.12 21:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really.  The images of her themselves are not in question and, I assume, merely for decoration purposes.  See counterexample # 8 to the Wikipedia Fair Use Policy.  In theory, it would not be terribly difficult for someone to find a free image of her (find her, take a picture) which makes a fair use argument that much more difficult. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use image

message: On March 6, 2007 a $2,400 ad was put in the Hartford Courant in the form of an open letter to the chief state's attorney.  Because it was an ad it wasn't posted on the courant's website (www.hartfordcourant.com) and although it was reported on NBC30 and WTNH I've been completely unable to find the text of this letter signed by 28 professors anywhere on the internet.  A link to the letter (or scan of the page from the newspaper) would be appreciated.  As best I can gather the gist of the ad is these experts are requesting the verdict either be set aside or that an independent investigator be called in. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.183.169.185 (talk) 19:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Found; provided--Elvey (talk) 01:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Open Letter to Chief State's Attorney Kevin T. Kane

message: I tagged this for natability and it was removed by LittleOldMe who left the following note on my talk page, copied and replied here:
(note by LittleOldMe)
I am puzzled as to why you tagged this article for lack of notability.
There are six references (pared down to the most relevant) that clearly prove notability.
In fact, Julie Amero's case is so notable that she has made the national news in Ireland. LittleOldMe 11:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is cutting edge law.  The Portuguese football team's practice is not cutting edge law, or even law.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.158.108 (talk) 20:56, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: All stories like this have two sides.  Is there any particular reason why the side of the school district and prosecuting authorities, no matter how weak, is not expressed here?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.26.53.131 (talk) 18:23, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Two Sides

message: The intro states that the case is notable for covering DNS hijacking.  While that may be true the real notability/notoriety is for prosecutorial and police misconduct/incompetence and the technical incompetence of the school district resulting in the criminal prosecution of what was essentially a third party to the criminal conduct.  The school district's ISO (assuming they had one) should have been fired/prosecuted before a sub teacher.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.223.87 (talk) 08:04, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with Intro 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Connecticut v. Amero. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090116040313/http://www.computerworld.com:80/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9121218&intsrc=news_ts_head to http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9121218&intsrc=news_ts_head
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Connecticut v. Amero. 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.courant.com/news/local/hc-julie1122.artnov22,0,5838504.story?track=rss
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080705102738/http://csriu.org/onlinedocs/AmeroTragedy.pdf to http://csriu.org/onlinedocs/AmeroTragedy.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071030013735/http://www.faithandthecity.org/issues/education/articles/Questionable-conviction.shtml to http://www.faithandthecity.org/issues/education/articles/Questionable-conviction.shtml
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) 17:51, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Connecticut v. Amero. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090124121203/http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/julieamerosummary.pdf to http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/julieamerosummary.pdf
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) 06:03, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified