Talk:Philip Aziz

message: I removed things that looked like a press release rather than a discussion of his art or important parts of his life: "Honorary Admiral in the Texas Navy" and "Big Sisters camp out at his home" came out, his education and art teaching stay in, of course. Also some of the "unveiled his latest masterpiece" bits, partly because it's contradictory--three unrelated paintings can't each be someone's "latest masterpiece," and partly for NPOV. Long quote of someone praising him came out because, again, it reads like a press release, not useful biography or art criticism. Vicki Rosenzweig 16:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :Image:Londonflag.PNG 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 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 06:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Londonflag.PNG

message: :Image:Londonflag.PNG 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 05:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Londonflag.PNG

message: :Image:Londonflag.PNG 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 23:20, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Londonflag.PNG

message: There is a problem with the Philip Aziz article. Much of it, or even most, seems to be unsourced, and thus unverifiable, WP:V. The current two references and nine external links seem substantial, but they are of limited use to support the article. I will itemize:
*Aziz, a critical profile, London, Ontario; New York, New York, September, 2003. I do not know what reference this is. It does not appear to be a known book, and it's title elicits no web hits other than the article, itself.
* talent still flying high, by reporter Kathy Rumelski, The London Free Press, November 30, 2006. Web sources requiring payment for access, such as the London Free Press, should be avoided because of their limited accessibility, WP:EL#Sites requiring registration.
* Philip Aziz Web site Personal web sites are not acceptable as sources, WP:SPS.
* Reasons for (Heritage) Designation of Aziz's home Non-functional web address.
* City of London Web site A general reference to the City of London, Canada, web site is also less than useful. If some specific page or pages relate to Mr. Aziz, that would be helpful.
* St. Peter's Basilica, a brief history in The London Free Press Same problem, as above, with the London Free Press.
* 150 People Who Define London A useful citation, but only as support for limited aspects of the article.
* Big Sisters' Web site Seems to have no connection with Mr. Aziz, and a local search there turns up nothing.
* City of London media release on Paul Haggis Day Non-functional web address.
* Paul Haggis Day in London by Barry Wells Does not really support much in the article.
* Robert Aziz's Web site Another personal web site.
I have a strong hunch that much of this article consists of original research on the topic. This is also not really allowed, WP:NOR. I have considered trying to improve the article up to the usual Wikipedia requirements, but my initial searches resulted in little useful factual support about Mr. Aziz. I hope someone can find some way to provide appropriate verification for much of the material here. Tim Ross·talk 16:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Hi Tim, just read your concerns about the Philip Aziz WP page. Most of those links worked fine at one time (I put the WP article up two years or so ago) but the City of London has redesigned its web site and the London Free Press it seems moves to a registration system after a certain period of time after the original article first appeared. This is likely a problem with hundreds of thousands of WP articles and frankly, I don't really have the time or inclination to be returning to the scores of articles that I've put up to be re-sourcing them. The Internet, as a reference tool (even apart from WP) has its limitations due to web site changes and dating back to only 1990s etc.
I live in London, Ontario, a mile from Philip's home at 150 Philip Aziz Avenue, but if you fail to believe that London has renamed a street after him, I won't lose any sleep over it. As I say, I've grown tired of WP and am moving on. I've done my bit. If editors want to re-write history and reality, que sera sera. There's loads of nonsense that occurs around here and frankly, its tiresome.
If you think the information is bogus, then go nuts and delete whatever. It's WP's loss because it's all 100-per-cent true and verifiable. I've pretty well moved on from WP due to all the in-fighting, editing wars and general lack of knowledge of many administrators and editors. Barry Wells (talk) 20:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If reliable sources are used then it doesn't matter whether or not anyone thinks it is bogus, because there is proof otherwise. If WP allowed anyone to post any information with no sources or proof then WP would be useless as a source of information. I believe you that you had working sources before but we can't just take people's word for it to add information, which is why there are policies in place.   
On that note, it does seem like a lot of the information in the Later years section needs citations so I am going to add the tag for that. LogicalFinance33 (talk) 05:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philip Aziz