jason Miller

--Wikipietime (talk) 12:00, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

You have to read carefully, but it's in there. ("His decision came after allegations of personal involvement with a Trump campaign staffer, and an earlier report of Miller visiting a strip club with other staffers and several members of the press before a presidential debate.") If you're asking why there's only that one sentence here but a two paragragh section in A. J. Delgado, that's a question I can't answer. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 16:39, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes, something smells. Since Miller works for a so-called "communications agency" I suspect someone from that office whitewashed out all references to his relationship with A. J. Delgado and absolutely no mention of the fact that he is a baby daddy. I don't care how close you read the baby daddy stuff is not there.--SlackerDelphi (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Until the birth of the child, sourcing was a problem. It no longer is a problem, so there's no reason for anyone to remove the information from this article. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 20:59, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Jason Miller's attendance at the Bear Week in Provincetown

Jason Miller has attended the annual gathering of Bears in Provincetown, Mass. several years but he stopped this in recent years. Why is he ignoring spreading Trump's message with people who he has had a relationship with? Is he permanently leaving the gathering or does he to plan to attend once again? This year's event was put off but they are already collecting names for the next event and unusually he has yet to register as a speaker there. (http://www.ptownbears.org/)

203.131.210.82 (talk) 02:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

IP, there’s really no point in speculating on such things. Here, at least. If there’s nothing substantial or noteworthy that contributes to the article, it probably doesn’t belong on the talk page. Just sayin’. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 03:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I think this page is being whitewashed by new users such as "Swiftie9898" who are only adding things which appear to promote the "Gettr" service. Note the bizarre and aggrandizing page title change. Miserlou (talk) 15:15, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Clare Jackson is also whitewashing this page. Miserlou (talk) 18:29, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

User:TheNorge1 is doing the same thing. All accounts trying to add the exact same information about Gettr and to downplay Miller's scandals. Miserlou (talk) 16:36, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Wiki suggests including a photograph of the profile to improve the page quality. There have been two unsuccessful attempts to include a photo of Jason Miller into the infobox of the page and with both being flagged for copyright infringement (although it seems that both attempts contained information about permission of ownership from the photographer - Jose Acha. Is there any suggestion on how to add a photo of him that does not violate the copyright clauses of Wikipedia?” — Preceding unsigned comment added by Upside WikiWriter (talk • contribs) 07:22, September 17, 2021 (UTC)

Three unsuccessful attempts, actually. The first two were by user User:Clare Jackson, in both cases trying to claim the same photo was someone other than Acha's work. The second time, they even went to the trouble of posting it to a Flickr account first, to launder its origin. You can see why there might be some skepticism about a third attempt with the same photo, although this time you do at least say the photo is Acha's.
Wiki Commons is very scrupulous about making sure any photos posted are not plagiarism. In a case like this where a photo is taken from a site where there is no evidence that the photo is freely licensed, the solution is to provide evidence of permission, as described in the tag that has been added to the photo there. In a nutshell: Acha will need to send an email to confirm that he is the owner of the copyright, and that he freely licenses the photo for use anywhere (not just on Wikipedia).--NapoliRoma (talk) 15:16, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Oh, of course, another way to do this is to use another photo that doesn't have licensing issues. Also, if you want to see more info on licensing policy, see commons:Licensing.--NapoliRoma (talk) 15:31, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm guessing this one wouldn't count? Seems to be the only one available with CC license, unless someone wants so look through official White House photos from the transition period. jonas (talk) 22:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
It looks like no. The image is licensed under (CC BY-NC 2.0), which prohibits commercial use, and commons:Licensing says:
Media licensed exclusively under non-commercial only licenses (like CC BY-NC-SA) are not accepted either.
--NapoliRoma (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)