User talk:JammerPro#top

History shows the present user page has not been flagged, is properly disclaimed, and supported by references.

Hello, JammerPro, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as :User:JammerPro/sandbox, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• The perfect article
• Task Center{{snd}}need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{tl|help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! AntiDionysius (talk) 10:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg

{{Quote box|quote=

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on :User:JammerPro/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
• It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=User%3AJammerPro%2Fsandbox|deleting administrator}}, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. AntiDionysius (talk) 10:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

File:Information.svg Hello, JammerPro. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{tl|edit COI}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see {{Section link|Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI}});
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see {{Section link|Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming}});
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.{{#ifexpr: ({{#time: U | now}} - 1708251313) < 13150000 | {{PAGENAME}} | }} AntiDionysius (talk) 10:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

:Thanks for the insights. I will review the policies more closely with an eye towards compliance. JammerPro (talk) 14:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I've read your email – there's nothing in it that you couldn't have posted here on this page. You seem to misunderstand the purpose of this project – it is an encyclopaedia, not a social media platform. Two things in particular that you should know: the writing of autobiographies is strongly discouraged (please see below); and this project does not tolerate promotion of any kind, not excluding self-promotion. So a page that starts off "Elliot M. Zimmerman ... is a renowned entertainment lawyer ..." has little chance of survival. You can read about our notability requirements for biographies here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

:Thanks for the explanation. I read the notability requirements and will revise accordingly in the future.  JammerPro (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

File:Information.svg Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article, or a draft for a Wikipedia article, about yourself, at :User:JammerPro/sandbox. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Notable people who have edited Wikipedia). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:41, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Please read WP:TALK.

• Sign your posts.
• Don't change your posts after they have been replied to.
• Be concise.

Use the COI edit request {{edit COI}} to make a clear "Change X to Y" type request. See :Template:Edit COI.

Please read WP:LEGAL. Your comment: {{tq|Review defamation by omission.}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Ink_Spots&diff=prev&oldid=1291011956]could be viewed as a perceived legal threat, particularly since you have a COI as a lawyer having represented the group and one individual involved in this situation [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Ink_Spots&diff=prev&oldid=1290889234] and are making an "official" request for a change [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Ink_Spots&diff=next&oldid=1291011956]. Meters (talk) 00:23, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:I did not realize I was editing replies. I will not do that again. Additionally, I did sign the initial post, but when I rearranged it, it became 2 posts. In the future, I will check to make sure I sign everything when splitting the posts. Last but not least, do I need the COI template, or is my BOLD disclaimer (which I did in response to User:Drmies reply that flagged me) sufficient. Note, I removed Drmies comments, as I corrected the signature. JammerPro (talk) 01:20, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:Additionally, "review defamation by admission" is not a threat, but guidance to review omitted material information. If this is still a problem, let me know and I will consider removing it. JammerPro (talk) 01:23, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:Finally, I will be more precise when I edit (e.g. x for y). And thanks for the instructions. JammerPro (talk) 01:24, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:There is yet another concern. User:Drmies comment could be viewed as implying newspaper articles trump active U.S. Trademark Registrations, in light of the article on The Ink Spots stating the name is considered to be in the public domain, is disturbing. How can that be? User:Drmies comments "it doesn't matter" can be viewed as supporting infringement. This is not a threat. Kindly review his statement. JammerPro (talk) 01:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:I WOULD LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTIOIN TO THE WP:LEGAL citation you supplied. It is clear, asking someone to "review a statement with an eye towards defamation" IS NOT VIOLATIVE. See the following:

:Defamationhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:No_legal_threats&action=edit§ion=3 edit source

:Further information: Wikipedia:Libel

:A discussion as to whether material is libelous is not a legal threat. The policy on defamation is to delete libel as soon as it is identified. If you believe that you are the subject of a libelous statement, email info-en-qwikipedia.org.

:Please review the foregoing and remove the tags you placed here in light of the foregoing. Also, I believe at this time DrMies may have been upset that I corrected him which provoked his behavior. Please review his talk page, The Ink Spots page and advise me accordingly. Thank you. JammerPro (talk) 02:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

::Just about everything trumps a trademark registration; on Wikipedia we use secondary sourcing. I am not sure why you think I'm upset, and I'm not sure that you actually corrected me anywhere. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Regarding Trademark Registrations and Secondary Sourcing  

:::I appreciate the discussion around the **Ink Spots** trademark and the article's representation of the name's status. Trademark registrations serve a **legal function**, which differs from the **notability** criteria used in Wikipedia. While secondary sources are critical for establishing historical context, the enforceability of a **U.S. Trademark Registration** remains a matter of **legal authority**, which typically overrides claims of public domain—except when ruled otherwise by a **court or the USPTO**.

:::I want to emphasize that **this is not a threat**—only a factual clarification. The **primary concern** of a trademark owner is **preventing infringement**, not proving notability. If there are **conflicting claims** in the article regarding trademark status versus public domain designation, it may be worth reviewing the wording to ensure accuracy.

:::If needed, I can provide sources supporting the current **legal status** of the Ink Spots trademark. Let me know how best to proceed.

:::BTW, I learned about the 4 tilde's to autosign. JammerPro (talk) 02:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Additionally, because all seems ccorrected now, how about removing all the tags you placed? JammerPro (talk) 02:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Also, here is the template for COI, I guess I should have put it in above, but being that you replied, here it is.

{{Connected contributor|user=JammerPro|declared=Yes|otherlinks=Talk:The Ink Spots#Jim Nabbie joined the Ink Spots in 1945}}

:::Connection: I am a lawyer and collaborated with the subject of the article. I have served as a collaborator, producer, writer, musician, and former attorney for The Hanover Group, Inc., Jim Nabbie, and The Ink Spots. JammerPro (talk) 03:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

::::You now say that you were formerly an attorney for the Ink Spots, Jim Nabbie, and The Hanover Group. You also called your request an "official" request. What's official about it? Are you being paid to do this? If you so you must use the paid COI editor template and specify who you are working for. If not, who asked you to do this?

::::As for the perceived legal threat, yes that's an issue when you, a lawyer working for the involved parties, claims to be making an official request, and suggests that Wikipedia might be guilty of defamation by not adding your suggested information. If you have no intention of starting any legal matters then please clearly say so, and don't don't bring up defamation. If you have any intention of pursuing legal matters with Wikipedia than please stop editing Wikipedia. Meters (talk) 05:43, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::Response to Discussion on The Ink Spots Article

:::::I appreciate the ongoing discussion regarding the accuracy of the Ink Spots article, particularly concerning trademark registrations versus claims of public domain status. To clarify my position:

:::::1. Trademark Enforcement & Legal Context

::::: - Trademark registrations serve a "legal function", which differs from Wikipedia's notability criteria.

::::: - While secondary sources establish historical context, a live U.S. trademark registration remains a matter of legal authority, unless legally overturned.

::::: - The primary concern of a trademark owner is preventing infringement, not proving notability.

:::::2. Discussion on Defamation by Omission

::::: - I understand concerns about Wikipedia’s legal policies, and I respect the need for proper sourcing and neutrality.

::::: - My reference to **defamation by omission** was not a legal threat but a request for a review of omitted material information.

::::: - Wikipedia’s own policy states:

::::: “A discussion as to whether material is libelous is not a legal threat.” (See Wikipedia:No_legal_threats#Defamation).

:::::3. Request for Review of Sources & Policy Compliance

::::: - The current article suggests that the name Ink Spots is in the public domain, relying on decades-old newspaper sources. I advised User:Drmies that his comment could be viewed as implying newspaper articles always trump active U.S. Trademark Registrations.

::::: - However, primary source from the USPTO confirms that the trademark was live and registered.

::::: - Wikipedia's policy recognizes that primary sources, when supported by secondary sources, are relevant in establishing facts (See Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_primary_sources).

:::::4. Request for Further Editorial Review

::::: - I believe that the Fuqua v. Watson case, discussed in a reliable secondary source from Aug. 4, 1985, should be referenced (See Talk:The_Ink_Spots#Footnote11). This article states Watson never stopped using the mark the Ink Spots while performing with Nabbie from 1945 onward, which caused Fuqua to sue in 1955. This supports Nabbie's contention for registration of the mark in 1984 to The Hanovver Group, Inc.

::::: - Additional secondary sources further support the primary source at the USPTO, reinforcing the accuracy of trademark ownership claims.

:::::5. Clarification Regarding My Role & Intent

::::: - My connection to **Jim Nabbie, The Hanover Group, Inc., and The Ink Spots** has been fully disclosed from the beginning.

::::: - My past work involved songwriting, production, and legal representation, but my involvement ended years ago.

::::: - I am participating in this discussion purely for historical accuracy, not for legal action at this time.

:::::I respectfully request that editors review the sources and consider necessary revisions to ensure the accuracy of the article, particularly regarding the trademark status versus public domain claim. Additionally, I hope my previous correction of formatting errors and tone adjustments help clarify my intent.

:::::Let me know if this refined version works for you! I aimed for greater precision, neutrality, and professionalism while keeping your points intact.

:::::Thanks in advance. JammerPro (talk) 08:20, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't know who you are talking to, but at some point [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJammerPro&oldid=prev&diff=1291293452 this] might play a part in your future on Wikipedia (because you are wrong, and WP:CIR). About that future: stop pinging me, OK? I have no interest in your musings. As {{U|Meters}} is my witness, if you do ping me, I will drop a personal harassment warning right here. And stay away from my talk page too: the day is too beautiful for it. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 12:09, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

You seem to do a lot of waffling...

• Again, how is this an "official" request, as you claimed? How exactly are you acting in an official capacity in this matter? If it's an official request then you clearly still have some involvement with these people and groups. Either you are acting in an official capacity or your "involvement ended years ago", and you are "participating in this discussion purely for historical accuracy".
• And no, I don't think "I am participating in this discussion purely for historical accuracy, not for legal action at this time." meets my request: {{tq|If you have no intention of starting any legal matters then please clearly say so, and don't don't bring up defamation. If you have any intention of pursuing legal matters with Wikipedia than please stop editing Wikipedia.}} It's a yes or no situation. No equivocation. Meters (talk) 21:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:1) Recognized synonyms for "officially" and/or "official" are "formally" and "formal." It is in that sense that I used the term. If you are asking am I officially acting for others, the answer is no. 2)I have "no" intention of bringing suit or starting legal action.

:Declaration: I have a COI because I represented and corroborated with The Hanover Group, Inc. (which dissolved in 2009 after Millie Lilley's demise), Jim Nabbie (who passed in 1992), and the Ink Spots (until the mark was transferred in 2009).

:Best wishes.

:|JammerPro (talk) 23:37, 20 May 2025 (UTC)|

Hello. I notice you often organize your comments into these 'legal document' type messages. I get you're a lawyer, and that's pretty cool, but Wikipedia isn't that formal. Some users struggle to understand the true meat and bones of some of your comments because of this. You're allowed to be casual here without the professionalism. Thanks. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 16:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Tarlby. I wanted to express my heartfelt thanks for your wonderful advice and support! You've been so helpful, and I truly value your guidance.

:I must admit, I felt a bit hurt by how things unfolded - especially when someone took that unexpected shot at me, and then things quickly escalated to threats even after I shared my well-researched response about discussing defamation. While I happen to be a lawyer, I was careful to play by the rules!

:You know, I've got this passion project that means the world to me - setting the record straight about The Ink Spots. It's one of those bucket list items that I really want to accomplish while I still can.

:I'm so delighted our paths have crossed! And just to add a light-hearted note - I'm not one for threats... I simply let the paperwork do the talking! 😊 I had to chuckle about Drmies' misread of the situation. Here's hoping that chapter is behind us now!

:Wishing you all the best and thank you again for being such a wonderful help!

:With sincere gratitude,

:(JammerPro (talk) 18:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC))

:: There are rules and then there are norms. If you stay in your seat when the bailiff says "all rise", you'll be in trouble whether there's a written rule or not. BD2412 T 22:20, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Reading the steps won’t make you a dancer—you’ve gotta move to the music! There’s a learning curve here, and I fully expected a few smackdowns while I figured out the footwork.

:::But listen, I want you (and whoever else stumbles through here) to know I really did read the rules. Legal threats? COI? Tertiary, Secondary, and Primary Sources? I studied them like a law student cramming for the bar exam.

:::Honestly, I’m kind of flattered having been flagged for formality, structure, being an AI robot, and for being a lawyer. Impressive! Someone even misquoted Shakespeare—though they didn’t finish the reference about killing all the lawyers. Did all the editors out there know Shakespeare actually meant that would be bad because without lawyers, there’d be chaos?

:::Aside from an attorney, I'm an entertainer and Wiki is a really tough audience! Anyway, just wanted to say thanks for the feedback. I’ll keep dancing—hopefully with fewer stumbles!

:::If you can help with my proposed changes to the Ink Spots article, I would truly appreciate it.

:::Best.

:::|JammerPro (talk) 02:47, 21 May 2025 (UTC)|

::::I've stumbled across this via WP:ANI. You say there that you will drop the stick but here you are still asking someone (BD2412) to help you effect the changes which you wish to see. Those changes aren't going to happen for the reasons many contributors far more experienced - and less verbose - than you have explained.

::::I'd say that you are within six hours of an indefinite block. Just stop: don't even return to that article or its talk page, don't mention the Ink Spots anywhere and don't refer to anything which might have even a tenuous connection to legal matters or to primary sources. Go edit some of the many millions of other articles. - Sitush (talk) 04:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::Just saw this. I'm done. JammerPro (talk) 05:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Information orange.svg Please do not attack other editors, as you did at :Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Per the large notice at the top of WP:ANI you are required to notify any editor you take to ANI. You did not do so when you clearly included me in the report by accusing me of proxying for Drmies with {{tq|After I pinged Drmies, he alerted another editor, which appeared to encourage a biased response against me based upon my statement to review defamation by omission.}} Drmies did not contact me in any way. I consider that statement to be a personal attack, as is your characterization of my edit as "biased". Meters (talk) 05:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

:Just to clarify, Drmies did ping me to your talk page, but that was almost 12 hours after my initial post to your page, and more than 6 hours after my second post. There was no other communication between us, either on Wikipedia or off. Meters (talk) 05:36, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks for the explantation. I appreciate it. JammerPro (talk) 06:22, 21 May 2025 (UTC)