Talk:Shawn Gibson

Fair use rationale for Image:ShawnGibson.jpg

Image:ShawnGibson.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) 05:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality

I chose to dispute the neutrality of this article because there are two specific incidents that I believe portray GIbson in a negative light. The portion discussing the stars and stripes article that mentions only the last line which is a motto and the end of the article which seems to say that Gibson exaggerated claims of fighting.

I myself am a soldier in the Army, and I myself disagree with the events in the Palestine Hotel. Regardless, if this article is to include information that is irrelevant, such as a unit motto, then it should be balanced with positive aspects. Better still, irrelevant information should be discarded entirely, such as both the motto quote and the personal, dubbed statement of the narrator from a documentary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Far2813 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with removing the motto if it is indeed a unit motto. If "we" just refers to him and friends, then it deserves to stay. You have a citation for it being a unit motto? Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 18:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

actually, no I cannot find anything. I am almost positive it is a unit motto, however, it is true that this alone is not good enough. That said, though I believe the article does in fact only display one aspect, I cannot keep the dispute going as I cannot find anything further on the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Far2813 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)