Talk:Galaxy (Australian television)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
 | Copyright examination was requested regarding subject described below. Sadly copyright examinations is not the right place for the request. The most common reason is that the content has already been added/uploaded to Wikipedia. Such cases (violations or not) are taken care of at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. The request has been moved to List of rejected requests. Please move the request to a better location so it can be taken care of. When the request is moved and/or backed up, please remove this template and the entry from copyright examinations page. |
Ambiguity Issue edit
I am the CEO of Australis Media Pty Ltd - a company by the same name as the one which once owned Galaxy, and was deregistered many years ago. I am concerned that the article reads in such a way as to fail to make it clear that the Australis Media mentioned is long deregistered and NOT the same company as mine. Would it be correct for me to edit this page to make explicit reference of the fact that my company is a different one? What to do? Alicam (talk) 01:31, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Well it seem that the de-registered company name was "Australis Media Limited". Do you feel that changing it from "Australis Media" to "Australis Media Limited" will show that your company isn't the same? Bidgee (talk) 01:42, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Can I suggest you both change it to "Australis Media Limited" and then add "(company deregistered)" to make it explicit that the company was shut down a number of years ago. There were a number of companies in the "group" including that name, and all were deregistered between 2005 and 2007. Thanks! Alicam (talk) 14:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Copyright Issue edit
It looks like most of the history has come from http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/01/31/1043804519651.html I doubt this has been used with permission. --Lodders 02:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
All information has to be sourced from somewhere. Since it is not copied verbatim I don't see how it's copyright violation. The article could do with more referencing however. --211.26.7.36 05:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)