This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The above mentioned file may have conflicted licensing. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image appears to have conflicted licensing Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Not conflicted licensing as such, but it's time that the only acceptable 'permission' was one to release under CC-BY-SA lodged with OTRS.
Otherwise such media is 'non-free', and needs to be treated as such REGARDLESS of what the publisher/uploader have agreed. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:06, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image may contain conflicted licensing. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
I received notification that there is a question about the copyright of this file. The file is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2. The license holder, Freemuse, specifies this on this page.
I would fix this myself, but I am not exactly sure how to go about it. Can you help? Thanks. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 16:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted media may have conflicted licensing Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
This public internet at high school. please do not respond to our talk page. -- 168.10.168.201 ( talk) 14:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to a another contributor with toolserv access there is now a 'partial' list of media with potentially 'conflicted licensing'
Link is : http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/reports/miss_tagged_files.txt
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Kaitlyn Maher at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
I can help with expanding the urls and citing the paragraphs; however, am a little concerned if it will pass
WP:Notability as now written. Any views on this is appreciated at the submission's entry. Kindly
Calmer
Waters
14:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
See comment in infobox... Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
J. I have reached the extent of my writing skills with this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pga1965/Kaitlyn_Maher and don't know how to lodge it. could you reply to my talk page please.
Pga1965 ( talk) 12:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Neal E. Boyd won that series, but Kaitlyn didn't make the final "5"
also I cannot find all of the authors for her songs, the album has been released digitally, but the physical release is set for dec 17, 2009.
Pga1965 ( talk) 23:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
ok moved to main wikipedia
Pga1965 ( talk) 06:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thanks 4 nomination
would you say the article is still a stub(i realise i did put that on myself)?
Pga1965 ( talk) 03:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
how do i protect the article from non-registered users changing things?
Pga1965 ( talk) 07:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
could you please review the wholesale changes being made to the article? 17 changes in 8 hours
Pga1965 ( talk) 03:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi. User:Xeno popped by my page looking for a copyvio admin. It is an image issue that touches on Wikipedia, Commons and WP:NFC, so you were the admin who immediately popped to my mind. :) The discussion at my talk page, User talk:Moonriddengirl#MRG to the rescue.21, links to the issues. This one has gotten pretty nasty and seems to be getting worse. Note the edit history of [1] and the new section at File_talk:Chicago_Spire.jpg#Dec_10.2C_2009.2C_third_dispute. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:54, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Sufficient rationale? Your view welcomed Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:27, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
As this was one I got rescued, I am slightly disapointed that someone's now tagged it as non-free. If it is non-free, I need some help in providing a rationale.
The user who tagged it as non-free , seems to to be applying policy a little literally on a number of other images as well (Check their contribs..). Perhaps you could tell that user to be a little bit more flexible? (Or at the very least notify the original uploaders?
I also note they rewrote some sourcing information on something else http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File:Lebanesearmyfirstflag.png&diff=prev&oldid=329879675 which IMO makes it less clear what the sourcing of the image/design is.
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey, JM, I know it sounds like I'd be the last person to comment on this, but, I thought in Wikimedia Commons that uploaded photos were supposed to have watermarks and photographers' names removed before using them. See here?: [2] Just wondering. Thanks.-- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 18:08, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
that can respond to User_talk:MBisanz#Images_on_Sugarcane_Grassy_Shoot_Disease_.28SCGS.29. MBisanz talk 06:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for ur reply. Please restore images of 'Sugarcane Grassy Shoot Disease'under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 license, as u suggested. I am OK with that. Thanks again.
Amityadav8 ( talk) 17:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 19:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Apologies for any duplicates to one previously reported. The following messages can be removed once read. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:15, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:15, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
This is regarding an oTRS issue on commons. Iv sent the permission email twice, but its not been updated yet. Iv had a bot msg re this on my talkpage today to follow up else the images may b deleted. How do u suggest I go bout this?
Thanks, Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 23:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks for the reply. The following images were included in the email:
1. Vadtal Showers.jpg
2. Vadtal.jpg
3. Vadtal Shikhar.jpg
4. Shree Swaminarayan Mandir.jpg
5. Jetalpur.jpg
6. Manaki Ghodi.jpg
7. Maharajshri.jpg
8. Acharya.jpg
9. Shri Swaminarayan Mandir.jpg
10. Shikhara.jpg
The email starts with "FOR THE ATTENTION OF OTRS PERMISSIONS".
Regards - Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 11:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. With regards to the three images in question, they are the property of the Swaminarayan Sampraday. The email permission has come from the official Swaminarayan Sampraday website, so I do not see the issue. Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 16:26, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
I really dont see the issue here. This is governed by Indian Law, where rights expire 70 years after the artist dies. Now, these paintings are probably well over 150 years old (they are portraits of the first Acharyas during their time in office - which was the first half of the 19th Century). The way it works is someone is hired to make a portrait - they make it, get the money for it and the portait is then owned by the temple (or Swaminarayan Sampraday organisation). At that time there was no real fuss bout rights and such stuff - I can confirm that whatever paintings are owned by the Swaminarayan Sampraday - it holds the rights for as well (where there are rights). Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 19:26, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 21:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 21:28, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:57, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 23:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 23:43, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 00:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 10:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 11:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:07, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I found this on the en.Wikipedia, and think it belongs on Commons. Can you do this? [3] Thanks. -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 06:48, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Sfan00_IMG&oldid=333863567#December_2009
I can't work out what it refers to... , Surely you are allowed to remove speedy tags on images you tagged, but on reflection felt where NOT justified...
I am also needing a review of the caption cleanup in case I missed something.
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 20:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Caspian blue is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Xmas,
Eid,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hannukah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.
-- Caspian blue 21:56, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Amit Yadav 12:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amityadav8 ( talk • contribs)
Amityadav8 ( talk) 14:21, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks n regards, Amityadav8 ( talk) 16:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
word just in from AAO music, "Connie Talbot's Holiday Magic" DVD, has reached #1 on the music DVD charts in Hong Kong. see this thread for further info http://connietalbot.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=shawn1&action=display&thread=2717&page=1
Pga1965 ( talk) 10:39, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
J. could you also review my edits of connie talbots Holiday_Magic_(album) please.
Pga1965 ( talk) 12:13, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I realise this is a forum post, but it IS locked for exclusive postings from Shawn of AAO Music. Should I therefore ask him to include this information on the AAO website/news.
Pga1965 ( talk) 02:11, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi JM, I have a photographer from Turkey who is having trouble navigating her way through the red tape there. Since I don't speak any language close to hers, (I think she's exasperated), and finally sent me the photos (Of Ron Wood and Mick Jagger). I don't have an ORTIS account. She sent them photos in an email with the comments to please provide links to her name and photostream. Would it be possible to email them to you, and see if you can get them in? This language problem is getting to wear on me! Oh, please respond on my talk page, and I'll do the same here if you wiah. -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 21:28, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Well, I've had several Flickrmails with her, which I can copy and paste here.. and the last was this: (Title of email was) "My Ron Wood and Mick Jagger photos" Here are my photos... Please link them back to my flickr account and write my name under. Thanks, Eszter Turbéky So, that's the final comment. There were three; the first, was my contacting her, and she asked if there was any financial compensation. I told her no, but for those curious, they can click the photo and find her name and Flickr photostream. She wrote back saying that it was a pity, but she was willing for these two pics. When I tried to tell her how to change the license from copyright to CC-BY-SA, it became difficult for her, and that last response I sent you included an attachment of the two photos. What can I do? -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 22:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
It was worth a shot though. I will think hard and try and find an appropriate one. -- Kumioko ( talk) 14:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I missed that. I'll replace it now. Thanks for the heads up. Tiamut talk 18:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
As you were in the process of reverting my reversions, I was in the process of inserting rationale on the media page.
Although I appreciate you attention to this matter on the West Virginia basketball pages, and as an "administrator" I am sure you are much more well versed than me in Wikipedia policy, I do take issue with the manner by which you are trying to implement a precedent. I do not appreciate the passive aggressive tone you have taken with me. In my more than three years editing Wikipedia pages, I have never been treated like this (as you can see by the talk on my page, people seem to appreciate the work I do). As an "administrator", I would expect you to be more courteous and helpful in addressing things you see as in error, rather than micromanaging, especially when the concerns you raise are of a much broader consequence to the use of athletic team logos on Wikipedia pages in general.
So as to whether or not it is an "appropriate" use of non-free images. I think you would agree with me that, like all other athletic team pages (such as West Virginia Mountaineers men's basketball, which you also removed the logo from, most likely because there is no non-free rationale), the logo is an important component of the identity of the team, no matter whether it is a single season or the entire entity. That said, I disagree with your assessment that these sorts of pages are "discussing the team's performance in a certain year", rather they are building the identity for that team in a particular year. And so I'm arguing point 8 of the policy, that it is contextually significant, and is therefore an important component to the page itself. But if you disagree with me, then this gets to my other issue of the way you appear to be micromanaging. If you are going to remove the Flying WV logo from this page, then why not remove the logos from all the single season pages for all sports teams on Wikipedia? If you have a problem with the execution of drug pushers in China, then why are you focusing all your attention on a single executor, instead of working to establish and implement a universal standard? Sinisterminister ( talk) 19:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
On the contrary, I am taking liberties which I believe are most certainly within range of non-free use rationale. I do not believe I am disregarding this criteria in any way, especially not in spite of your handling of this situation, and believe that use of this logo is important to the identity of the team in all its forms. Again, I will refer you to this discussion: Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2009/October#Extent of non-free usage. If you have been too busy to read it, I suggest you do and get back to me in more explicit terms about why your judgement seems to contradict what was established in this discussion. Sinisterminister ( talk) 20:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I tagged some iamge for license/source issue. Uploader's complaining I didn't respond to their comments, I didn't get any comments other than the complaint... See User_talk:Sfan00_IMG and User_talk:S.S._Miami Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 10:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Are the licenses now satisfactory?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:32, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Done I have changed my flag to Dublin. Thanks for alerting me. Cargoking talk 11:32, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I was in need of a tag for the actual images, any suggestions? Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I have a number of food-related images of products, logos, organzations and other trademarked, copyrighted or otherwise non-free images I've uploaded to illustrate articles under the fair use rationale. Some of them were photos I took myself and some I found on flickr posted under CC-BY-2.0 licenses. Sfan00 IMG has let me know that a number of these have conflicting licensing tags, because they have both non-free notices/fair use rationales AND a free use license noted on the image page. Examples:
I thought the easy way to answer Sfan's concerns for photos I took myself was to remove my own GNU and CC licenses for the photos themselves, but I had another thought when I ran into one of my uploaded images on his list that I had found on flickr. I didn't take the photo, but the photographer had posted it with a CC-BY-2.0 attribution license, which means it could be used anywhere and in any way so long as the attribution (and the license) was included. I'm not comfortable removing someone else's license tag. So, it makes sense that the photo license be included and also the non-free tage and rationale as the subject matter depicts non-free material, such as an image of a product label.
As I thought about it, I noticed a note on Sfan's talk page from WhisperToMe regarding French licensing:
- in which there are two separate licenses, one for the photo itself and one for the content. That concept seems to perfectly sum up a photo taken of a trademarked or copyright-protected subject. I'm wondering if that is the correct approach to take regarding this specific type of product, logo or organization photo, whether or not French law is involved? It makes sense to me. What do you think? Thanks for the help. Geoff Who, me? 22:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
User:J Milburn has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Sfan00_IMG&diff=cur#.22Cannot_be_both_free_and_unfree.22
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 20:29, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, one last clarification. You said the good topic is eligible, but I can only claim the topic points for articles I worked on. In this particular good topic I'm hoping to work on, I was the primary author for all the articles, but of course, I did the work for most of them prior to this month. Can I still claim those if I do the good topic in January, or can I only claim the articles within the GT that I worked on in January? — Hunter Kahn ( c) 01:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
I created a possible tag for the image/media pages themselves as {{ Conflicted-license}}, Your opinions and possible cleanup to it would be appreciated before it's brought into active use. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 11:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, one last clarification. You said the good topic is eligible, but I can only claim the topic points for articles I worked on. In this particular good topic I'm hoping to work on, I was the primary author for all the articles, but of course, I did the work for most of them prior to this month. Can I still claim those if I do the good topic in January, or can I only claim the articles within the GT that I worked on in January? — Hunter Kahn ( c) 01:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
I created a possible tag for the image/media pages themselves as {{ Conflicted-license}}, Your opinions and possible cleanup to it would be appreciated before it's brought into active use. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 11:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Tagged by me, Uploader detagged... Retagged as it's Non-free.
Media concerned.. File:Wilsonville Spokesman newsbox.jpg
I don't want to have to 'keep' tagging it daily.. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
It seems the {{ conflicted license}} and the user notification is having the desired impact, 6 of the images tagged and notified have already had the conflicts resolved :)
There's been a disscusion started about it at, Wikipedia_talk:Image_copyright_tags#.7B.7BConflicted-license.7D.7D as well.
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 18:44, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I am completely certain that I will be eliminated in the 1st round because I don't understand the rules and haven't developed any strategy. In addition, I have a self imposed wikibreak for a few days at the beginning of every month so I that will remain interested in Wikipedia. That's my fault, not anyone else's.
Question 1. I think I know how to apply for points. Just edit this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special%3APrefixIndex&prefix=WikiCup%2FHistory%2F2010%2FSubmissions&namespace=4 according to the templates here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiCup/Submissions
___ a. No, you are an idiot
___ b. Correct, but you are still an idiot.
Question 2. You get points from making an article GA or FA, right? The other things like featured sounds, I never do (maybe a thing I should learn). No points for article improvement where the article is not a FAC or GAC.
___ a. Correct.
___ b. No, correct description is _________
Question 3. What is the criteria for a FA wikicup credit? Is it just reasonably significant contributions or is there a technical criteria, like number of edits?
I can think of 20 other questions but this is enough to get me started so that I won't be a fool with zero points. Maybe if there is a 2011 Wikicup, I can write the simple English translation? Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 21:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello J.Milburn
I've just signed up to WikiProject Sharks and was wondering if you, as another participant of the project, would know where I could find good coverage to expand two shark stubs that I've just created.
Orectolobus floridus Orectolobus reticulatus
Also, if there is anything I've done wrong, can you please let me know. Thanks. -- Domestic CAT 21:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I've left a similar message to the user you suggested.-- Domestic CAT 22:36, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I've gone and mainspaced this and listed at DYK. Any improvements would be appreciated. I'm still trying to get a free image too. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Somebody took my name off. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3AWikiCup%2FHistory%2F2010%2FContestants&action=historysubmit&diff=335790993&oldid=335779950 Please add it like you did with User:Grandiose. I am meek, not grandiose.
Note the time stamp. I asked to join before User:Grandiose did. I asked here. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Contestants&diff=prev&oldid=335779950 User:Grandiose asked 2 hours later. So I ask if I can be granted an addition to the list. If you want to slam the door shut after those who asked after User:Grandiose's request, I will not object since I qualify as an earlier request. JB50000 ( talk) 04:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I know that you are probably not involved in WikiProject Cats at all but you might be able to answer this:
See British Longhair.
I noticed an unsourced claim about an appearance in a cat food commercial. I've tagged it with "citation needed", but I don't believe (even if true) that mentions of appearances that cats of a certain breed have had in cat food commercials holds any encyclopedic value whatsoever. i was about to just remove it immediatley, but decided to seek a second opinion, just in case these sorts of claims are (by Wikipedia standards of course), of an encyclopedic nature. Thoughts?-- Domestic CAT 05:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Was there an OTRS confirmation on this image?
I am having the uploader moan at me because it was tagged for no rationale, will read over the image again, but appreciate a second opinion. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I'd just to thank you for completing my application for the WikiCup. I was relying on the goodwill of people like you to be accepted, and I'm very glad to have found.it. Germany is fine. Thanks again. Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 16:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- FASTILY (TALK) 04:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. Of course I don't want ! I prefer Canada which is not taken. If it becomes taken today, then alternative choices are Brazil then Chile. JB50000 ( talk) 05:19, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Darn, figured it would be okay because it wasn't actually featured on the mainpage until well into the new year. Never mind, hopefully there will be plenty more where that came from. Just FYI, I am being credited with the 10 points on the scoring page, I don't want to edit my score given the potential for drama and tomfoolery, but someone probably should remove it then. Cheers, Lankiveil ( speak to me) 09:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC).
Surely, the copyright on these images of old coins belongs to the photographer, and seeing as we have no evidence of release from the photographer, they should be deleted? J Milburn ( talk) 17:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
For your input in the West Virginia logo discussion. I trust that the ensuing conversation helped to answer your questions. If not, please visit my talk page. — BQZip01 — talk 02:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Why did you give me a warning? It seems as though the image I uploaded is just as good as any other image. I think it's acceptable. And make sure no one deletes it again without even telling why.
( S.S. Miami ( talk) 22:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC))
Hi, J Milburn. No problem about the gallery removal ( my gallery edit to Amanita muscaria). I can understand the reasoning behind not wanting articles to accumulate pictures in a gallery section. I do think that gallerys can be useful and that this article might benefit from one but I'm not going to press my point. Is there anywhere in the MoS that discusses this? Jason Quinn ( talk) 23:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Opinions?, I have had someone revert my 'conflicted' tagging of this? Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Hiya, User:Sfan00 IMG suggested I talk to you to resolve this issue. He tagged the image File:Unoabjd.jpg with {{ conflicted-license}}, but previous threads at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions suggest that free images of copyrighted sculptures/toys should be tagged with dual licenses: [6] [7]. Thank you for any input you have on this. Siawase ( talk) 11:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) There's a question on my user page about photographs of mobile phones. If you get a chance, could you come weigh in there? I'd be most grateful. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
the 2009 Togo national football team attack redirection should be deleted. The attack happened in 2010, not 2009-- 121.33.190.164 ( talk) 13:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Me again; sorry. :D I've just closed out a multiple image infringement case, and within minutes of my deleting File:MorganSquare.jpg, the image was returned to the article, having been uploaded by a brand new user at File:Spartanburg square.jpg. I do not know if we have the same contributor socking on Wikipedia (since s/he is now indef-blocked on English Wikipedia (and I've just put all of his or her images up for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Akhenaton06. I wonder if a sock investigation is appropriate...or even possible given how little QCdue has done.
In any event, I need to draw the attention of a Commons admin to the new upload and was hoping you'd have time to tag it or delete it or do whatever seems appropriate. It seems highly unlikely that the actual copyright holder just showed up to put it back at this specific point in time, but I do not have the original to point to (though it is used at myriad points around the web). -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
About the WikiBowl Silver, I see you don't want it on the WikiCup page. If you can notify the losers that there is a way to keep playing, that would be thoughtful. People still in WikiCup should not feel threatened as they earned more points. Having the chance to still play, but at the kid's table, not the adult table may encourage the losers to keep writing! JB50000 ( talk) 06:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
User_talk:Sfan00_IMG#File:Rochester_Midtown_Plaza_-_Interior.jpg Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 18:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm not being unreasonable am I? Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I've been going through some of my previous image work and found some stuff uploaded by this user:
The first two (based on the claims given) were transfered to Commons, (Tineye gave no results BTW)
I then found these, which had no description:
So I went to the uploaders talk page to leave an appropriate request, when I found that you had left them a slightly stronger worded message in relation to thier images in 2008 User_talk:Sureshiras#A_general_note_on_your_uploads...
Perhaps given that you found some problems previously you could review the 4 above along with :
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
This image is claimed to have a fair use rationale? Agree? Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Re: [8], thanks for helping to straighten that out. Powers T 03:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
The WikiCup got me looking through "my" old articles, thinking which ones to improve, and I realised that Roystonea regia was pretty close to what I might put up for a GA candidate. Not that this has any bearing on whether I put it up or not, but I was wondering whether this is significant enough "new" work (2010 work) to make eligible for consideration for WikiCup points. Just trying to get a sense of what might constitute "significant" work. Guettarda ( talk) 05:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Guettarda ( talk) 14:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
J. I understand Connie is not her real name. someone mentioned it is Constance Victoria Talbot. I don't know how I would verify that. obviously she is known as Connie.
Pga1965 ( talk) 13:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I recommended retagging, but disagree with your reasoning. You may wish to read my response at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_January_15#File:WorcsCoatArms.jpg. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 14:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Great_Britain_Snowy.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Makeemlighter (
talk)
18:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
|
I found I'd tagged the following for Commons move back in late 2008, On review I'm not so sure some of them can go on Commons...
Can you take a look over and tag accordingly?
Thanks in advance...
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 21:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing the article for me. Just to let you know, I have addressed your concerns, so if you could take another look at it, I'd appreciate it. -- Scorpion 0422 19:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I reffered the following to WP:PUI,
The uploader subsequently clarified the situation and I'm not sure they are now a PUI issue...
I think only admins can close PUI threads? So your advice would be appreciated, as well as any you can give to the uploader. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 20:37, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Hey JM, I uploaded a photo of Ben Taylor, and the photographer is Sean Rowe, with whom I have a good relationship. The photo came from Flickr. (Ben is BTW the son of James Taylor, etc.) Anyway, there's a woman performing in the photo next to him-- I believe Sean took it at a festival in the UK. Neither I nor Suede67 who I asked to crop the photo know who she is, and I emailed Sean and he didn't either. My request to crop her out of the photo just to show Ben was cheerily approved by the photographer. The image is in the infobox for Ben Taylor's article, so you can find it easily. My problem, is that someone came along afterward and either uploaded or placed the original photo back in Wikimedia Commons above the original and the cropped one. Nobody asked me why it was cropped, or mentioned what they were doing. With a 2.0 Creative Commons license and permission from the photographer, what can I do so that just his photo is in the freaking infobox? (Sorry, I'm Cranky... earache, infected). You are my best bridge between the two worlds of Wikipedia and Commons, so if you can help, or have advice, would you leave a note on my en.Wikipedia talk page please? Thanks. -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 23:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I was planning to try and help clear some of the backlog here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_reports/Non-free_files_missing_a_rationale
I would strongly welcome any reasonable challange you have to any I add. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
So what? So this...
Firstly: I'm assuming that you know that Paul Levitz, high profile (former) publisher of DC Comics rose through the ranks from comics fanzines...? That he was publisher/editor of et cetera, and took over the premiere fanzine of the day The Comic Reader - and continued to publish it after being hired by DC. That after he was hired by DC, he was one of those tasked with putting together their in-house fanzine The Amazing World of DC Comics - part-response to Marvel's FOOM (itself the successor to the out-of-house club/publication Marvelmania), part reaction to the professionalisation of amateur fanzines and an attempt to both jump on the bandwagon and get previews/behind-the-scenes/articles/biographies out to DC's fanbase. Levitz was one of the 'Junior woodchucks' (alongside Bob 'The Answer Man' Rozakis and others) who produced TAWODC, before rising to become Jenette Kahn's V.P. (by 1986 - can't date his promotion exactly at the present), and later President.
So what? So Levitz's histoy as a fan - indeed a BNF ("big name" fan) is integral to his subsequent career as editor/writer/VP/President for and of DC Comics. So his history as writer of fanzine articles and publisher of important fanzines is crucial both to his having been hired by DC, and his being involved in AWODC - iself one of the most important "pro-zines" (with FOOM and CBG and TCJ and the rest of them). Arguable, without Levitz's association with The Comic Reader, the subsequent chain that led him to Presidency of DC Comics might not have started. So his fanzine days are very important. Critically important, even.
He wasn't an artist, so while a cover of et cetera (published by Levitz) would fit adequately to illustrate this part of his career trajectory, it might potentially be confusing to... somebody. However, since the 'Junior woodchucks' were caricatured by Dave Manak in AWODC #13, this image serves - in the words of my edit (above) - to illustrate Levitz in his guise as "a prominent fan, fanzine publisher, contributor and subsequent [read: "future"] professional."
You queried whether I have read the non-free content criteria; I have. I'll briefly comment on the policy points:
There's palpably no edit war - I scanned this image from my own personal collection and amended the page in MAY 2008, to no obvious contention/disagreement from anyone until yourself, six days ago. Having been largely absent from here for a considerable time, I noticed this issue only today, and reinstated the image with what I felt was a reasonable - if necessarily brief - rationale. That it was moderately-swiftly redacted by Nightscream (who appeared to misinterpret my association of "prominent fan" - i.e. Paul Levitz not Dave Manak) might be construed as the begininngs of an edit war - since no reasonable attempt was made pre-redaction to contact me and ask for my reasoning (now lengthy reasoning!) in reinstating it... but there's no edit war and no ignoring of the rules. Hopefully this will, however, clarify things. :o) ntnon ( talk) 04:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Your thoughts welcomed: User:Sfan00_IMG/Sandbox Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
The situation is quite unclear. See here for a discussion, and the image page for more details. I'm currently trying to find the photographer. SlimVirgin TALK contribs 21:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Done! Thanks for your review. While I'm here, thought I'd mention that I'm thinking about bringing several of the B-class Lactarius articles you wrote to GAN this year... when I do, shall I put you as co-nom? Sasata ( talk) 01:33, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, as you pointed out my Wikicup flag is not free-licensed, please give me a random flag. Thanks J04n( talk page) 02:02, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Miami Florida city flag.svg is my flag. Thanks Secret account 13:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm fine with a random flag...thanks, Sabiona ( talk) 14:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just alerting you that your concerns are all fixed. Feel free to check back in whenever you like, and thanks for the review! :) The Flash {talk} 02:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello J Milburn/archive28, you have received this notice because you have placed your name on the list of members of WikiProject Metal. We are currently looking to make the wikiproject more active, and in doing so, we need to have a list of active members on the wikiproject. If you wish to stay an active part of wikiproject metal, please add your username to Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Active Users. Conversely, if you wish to leave the wikiproject, please remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Members. Thank you. |
Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Sfan00+IMG
I am trying to update some older fair use rationales..
Most of it's straightforward film posters/covers, but there's quite a lot of them still to do...
The screenshots and publicity stills using the rationales I'm updating will need a different approach.. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I recently undid an edit you made on the Sarah Palin page and I started a section on the talk page at "Inclusion or exclusion of File:GoingRogue.jpg" to discuss the merits for including or excluding the image. I was wondering if you could respond on the talk page so that the matter could be discussed? Chhe ( talk) 01:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Fail it it can not be expanded. -- Saint Pedrolas J. Hohohohohoh merry christmas 01:03, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for another review! Sasata ( talk) 03:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, can you delete all my HK22 pages. (I.E User:HK22/Sig) thanks. HK22 ( talk) 05:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the review and the barnstar! I wasn't thinking about FAC before, but you've inspired me to give it a shot! -- Pres N 03:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Do you have any idea of where or how to display a friendly message to attract quorum to the valued pictures? I mean, I don´t really care much about that little box top-right, I just want to do something because I consider the reviews/consensus in the valued piecture candidates is low. - ☩ Damërung ☩ . -- 03:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
You tagged File:Slide 1.jpg and File:Slide 2.jpg for deletion (or someone else did). I'm very happy you brought this to my notice. Actually, I created this file (in the sense, I captured it live). Can you tell me how to add the source information for these two files? I'm a little new to these things.
Thanx,
Ankitbhatt ( talk) 11:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanx again,
Ankitbhatt ( talk) 09:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I won't be able to get to the concerns just yet unfortunately (my computer got hit by the Blue Screen of Death) but I'll get to them as soon as I have immediate access to the internet. Cheers, The Flash {talk} 21:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
The Wikicup is a nice idea. I did not plan strategy so I am certain that I will not win. However, a win for me is if articles get written and I progress to the 2nd round without resorting to any tricks or even strategy. Even if I am eliminated, it is not a total loss as I have more than zero points now. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 19:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) We have a question at WT:CP about the handling of a 1902 painting on Commons. I believe I've addressed it correctly, but as I am not as firm in my footing on image questions as text and only really just beginning to get somewhat comfortable on Commons, I would very much appreciate your review, if you get a chance. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi! In regards to the AF headquarters, I visited CDG and got a shot of the AF headquarters from a different viewpoint:
In regards to the one currently here:
Which one do you think is a better illustration of the Air France headquarters? If you think the new one is better, I'll replace the old one with the new one. WhisperToMe ( talk) 16:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
You blocked this user back in September for uploading copyrighted/improperly licensed images. They are asking for unblock now. There may be a WP:COMPETENCE issue here, but they seem to at least understand why they were blocked. I was thinking of giving them a chance to prove it, but I'm checking in with you as blocking admin first. Beeblebrox ( talk) 19:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
A reply to your request at the Graphic Lab has been made. Please view the reply here. Cheers, Mononomic ( talk) 20:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Mr. Milburn,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Morchella conica 1 beentree.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 8, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-02-08. howcheng { chat} 08:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
I am not at all impressed by your arbitrary removal of a non-free file from this article. If you—as an uninvolved editor—have a problem with this file's rationale, then discuss it first on the article's talk page. Parrot of Doom 12:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Biological warfare. I have addressed all of your concerns, and responded there. Perhaps you could have another look? Cirt ( talk) 16:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I hope you did notice that I actually have addressed many of your concerns. (It did kinda sorta feel like an oppose... :( ) Cirt ( talk) 19:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Alright, I finally took care of everything at the GAR. :) The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 17:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Upon meditation I realised than I need to know your opinion on the following. Although most wartime photos are not in PD in Russia, they are in PD in some other post-Soviet states. Although Russia claimed to be a legal successor of the USSR, I am not sure if it automatically means that Russian copyright law covers all Eastern Front photos throughout the world. How this situation should be treated in your opinion?-- Paul Siebert ( talk) 20:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello J Miblurn, I hope you would be interested in a possible BLP contest. I would be happy to help in any way. Okip (formerly Ikip) 17:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Am I being unreasonable in tagging?
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Ustreammainlogo.png File:Ustreamlogo.jpg File:Justintv-logo.png File:Kotakusc.JPG
I've now hit 3RR on them :( Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh that's nice you choose me when there's lots of images why don't you just take down this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cena-STFU-07_2.jpg it's clearly not made by him Kreyg Talk 03:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Sfan00_IMG&diff=cur#SPAM
Since when is leaving messages requesting more information, SPAM?
Can you have a word with the user concerned, as I am suspecting a misunderstanding on their or my part.
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 11:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I've completed the vectorization: let me know what you think. Mononomic ( talk) 01:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I'm in a dispute with User:Paul Siebert over some World War II images on the Censorship of images in the Soviet Union article. Like I've spelled out on the talk page, I feel that these two images, reichstag with two Watchs and reichstag with one Watch should be allowed in the image. I feel this way because while they are non-free images they can't be replaced by free images and they demonstrate what was being censored out by Khaldei. As per WP:NFCC's clause #8 the images should be used because they significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and their omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Anyway I just want to get your opinion on if I have a case. -- Esemono ( talk) 23:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the support at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Biological warfare. Do you think your comments above in that page could be collapsed using hat/hab? Cirt ( talk) 20:08, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Further to our conversations about a year ago. Can I request the un-deletion of the following files- As you we see, they are no longer orphans and will be used in the info boxes of the following articles. I could upload them again Commonist is a wonderful thing- but I would then lose the file history and need to reproduce the Fair use statements, of which I don't possess a copy.
I see you are rather busy at the moment, I will leave this a week and if you can't get back to me- I'll post this request elsewhere. Thanks in advance -- ClemRutter ( talk) 14:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
As for Category:Textile mills in Lancashire, I don't consider myself an expert- but in wiki terms I probably know more than most, and my set up does allow me to generate Start class articles reasonable quickly (2 a day maybe). My focus has been with spinning, and the LCC mills in particular but Horrockses is in my list. Weaving sheds are lower down the list principally due to my lack of source material. The best starting point is
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (
link).I have added the portal to at least one mill, and both the Coppull mills are in the category. Now I must get back to real life Tescos beckons. -- ClemRutter ( talk) 20:32, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
A further five if you could be so kind
-- ClemRutter ( talk) 21:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Here are a further batch when you have a moment
I have definitely broken the back of the LCC mills. The aim was to get an established format and a substantial body of articles written ṕour encouragér les autres. -- ClemRutter ( talk) 18:39, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
This is the last batch- Iḿ off for a wiki-detox. There are a few Lancashire Mills here, but you are most welcome to add a few more. Until I do an expedition up to the ice flows of Bailrigg, I just can't get hold of the reference books I need and it is pointless struggling when there is so much more to do. -- ClemRutter ( talk) 21:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey. Looks like all the concerns have been addressed, so it can be re-looked at. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Mr. Milburn,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Morelasci.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 24, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-02-24. howcheng { chat} 22:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Is the edit any better? -- Muhammad (talk) 16:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Dustbin Baby- April in the graveyard.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Makeemlighter (
talk)
01:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
|
I thought you might be interested in this discussion about whether ships partly built in Cumbria (and Lancashire) come under the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria. Nev1 ( talk) 20:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey dude, I need to talk to you on IRC about the Cup when you get a chance. Hope to catch you tomorrow. — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 03:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I just got on to do the tiebreakers before work, but you've already done them; sorry about that. Yesterday was busier than I thought it was going to be; I managed to get on twice for like five minutes each. :/ I should be on tonight after 5pm CST. — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 15:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Good morning. :) I have a question about a Commons image; hope you can help out. As there's no freedom of panorama in France, how are we to determine the copyright status of the sign depicted in File:Orglandes War Cemetery 00.JPG? It was clearly created at some point after 1961 because of the text on it but the precise date is not stated. It's obviously uploaded in good faith, but if the text on the sign is under copyright, the image is a derivative work. Should this be tagged? With what? :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
;) Just kidding. — Hun ter Ka hn 22:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Round one is over, and round two has begun! Congratulations to the 64 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our first round. A special well done goes to Sasata ( submissions), our round one winner (1010 points), and to Hunter Kahn ( submissions) and TonyTheTiger ( submissions), who were second and third respectively (640 points/605 points). Sasata was awarded the most points for both good articles (300 points) and featured articles (600 points), and TonyTheTiger was awarded the most for featured topics (225 points), while Hunter Kahn claimed the most for good topics (70). Staxringold ( submissions) claimed the most featured lists (240 points) and featured pictures (35 points), Geschichte ( submissions) claimed the most for Did you know? entries (490 points), Jujutacular ( submissions) claimed the most for featured sounds (70 points) and Candlewicke ( submissions) claimed the most for In the news entries (40 points). No one claimed a featured portal or valued picture.
Credits awarded after the end of round one but before round two may be claimed in round two, but remember the rule that content must have been worked on in some significant way during 2010 by you for you to claim points. The groups for round two will be placed up shortly, and the submissions' pages will be blanked. This round will continue until 28 April, when the top two users from each group, as well as 16 wildcards, will progress to round three. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup; thank you to all doing this last round, and particularly to those helping at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot ( talk) at 00:48, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I was sick over the weekend, so I didn't get your message about WikiCup. I have responded on the talk page. It appears that, right at the end, one of my articles passed GA. See Talk:Henry Martin Tupper. -- Jayron 32 17:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I've replied but I doubt that Imatt would ever listen to any compromise-- Coldplay Expért Let's talk 21:58, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Keep Calm and Carry On Poster.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Maedin\
talk
07:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
|
Awesome, sounds like a win-win for everyone :-). Thanks for letting me know! Lankiveil ( speak to me) 09:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC).
but it is a free image, the author had given permission to me. there is the conversation between me (as varg) and the author (sorry, in turkish): http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/328/87430308.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infestor ( talk • contribs) 16:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi J Milburn, I've heard that you're one of our resident Image-OTRS experts. Would you mind taking a look at User_talk:Toon05#claimed_otrs_permission and the relevant image if you have the time? Unfortunately I don't have a ticket number for you. Cheers – Toon 19:03, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi JMilburn,
Greek Orthodox Church of the Annunciation has yet to appear on the main page, though its been nominated. I should mention that the same is true for two articles I listed in the first round of Wikicup ( Sharafat, East Jerusalem and Mujir al-Din al-'Ulaymi). If I should not be listing things until after they are approved for the main page, please let me know. I've been adding them as a I nom them, so as not to have to go dig up the nom diffs later. Sorry for any confusion. You might want to revise my first round point total to 110, and I'll relist the two articles I mentioned along with the church one in this one once they are appear on the main page. Thanks. Tiamut talk 16:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Your reasoning for deleting the above-mentioned image is false and at best weak! My copyright statement was accurate at the time of writing it; it remains accurate at this very moment that I am writing this message. You cannot take such action as you have taken on the basis of possible future events! When a free image turns up, by all means feel free and replace the present image with the free one; not until this has happened can you remove the present image on the basis of your false argument! --BF 17:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
You seem to have decided to make your presence felt! Go and look into the history of the file! The matter has already been discussed in detail earlier! (Talk with User:Feydey, and he will be able to tell you about the details. You may begin here). The person who has put the photograph on Persian Wikipedia owns the photograph and I have used exactly his desired copyright statement. If you cannot read Persian, seek some help from someone who can. Finally, please leave me in peace! I feel unable to live peacefully with those who embark on vendetta. If there is anything to be done, let that be done by Stifle. Incidentally, I told you earlier about my desire that the matter with regard to Michael Foot be dealt with by Stifle, but for some mysterious reason, you behaved compulsively by leaving message after message on my talk page on every single word that I wrote for Stifle, disregarding the very fundamental principle that my correspondence with someone else is my correspondence with someone else and you are not supposed to spy on them. Had you any relevant point, you had had to discuss them separately with Stifle, and I would not spy on your correspondence with him --- I had already unequivocally told you that I had no desire, none whatsoever, to discuss the matter with you. Now I hope that this is the last time we hear from each other. It was no pleasure knowing you! Please have the sensitivity to appreciate that in the course of the past ten hours or so you have overtaxed my patience, far in excess of what I am normally capable of tolerating (just count the number of the unsolicited messages that you have left on my talk page, after my explicit statement that I would leave the matter to Stifle to handle --- for some reason you could not help forcing yourself on me, that you were such an important and indispensable person here on Wikipedia and that you were always so right and ....). Now, please let this nightmare be over. --BF 02:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry for the mither, but would it be possible to check that this OTRS ticket applies to File:Delahoya1.jpg. Cheers. The uploader maintains that Mr Newton has a long-standing, and automatic open licensing for his images on WP. This ticket is linked to on about half a dozen images or so and the uploader just placed it on an image I tagged for no copyright or permission. Many thanks. -- Fred the Oyster ( talk) 21:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I made an alternate at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Desargues theorem.svg to account for the mistake in the original, would you be able to re-evaluate? Jujutacular T · C 23:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Cirt ( talk) 06:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I have put up an edit at the nomination. I would appreciate your feedback -- Muhammad (talk) 10:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Well there's not much point in saying that Cumbria needs more quality articles if I don't then do something about it, so what do you think of this? I've put it up at WP:GAC, but have an eye on FAC (one of the perennial problems with the articles I take to FAC is that I can't see problems with my own prose, so GAC should help smooth out some of the issues and the enforced break due to the backlog should allow me to approach the prose with fresh eyes later). The layout section needs finishing, but there's no rush at GAC, and I should be able to take care of it either tonight or tomorrow. The article touches on some pretty important parts of the region's history such as the Anglo-Scottish Wars, and hopefully makes for interesting reading. The main source I've been working from is a bit dense so an outside opinion on how the article comes across would be very welcome. Hopefully soon there'll be another article for the Cumbria portal's showcase, and perhaps at some point a mainpage appearance for WP:L&C. Nev1 ( talk) 21:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Can you copy the POTD blurb to the unprotected version? I can't keep up. -- tariqabjotu 00:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for commenting at Template_talk:Did_you_know#List_of_New_York_Legislature_members_expelled_or_censured. Please see also a discussion about that particular DYK nomination on WT:DYK, at Wikipedia_talk:DYK#DYK_hook_about_fact_of_history_from_over_200_years_ago. Thank you for your time, Cirt ( talk) 20:26, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Can you elaborate why you removed File:Eileen Olexiuk.jpg and File:Colvin testimony.jpg from Canadian Afghan detainee issue? As far as I'm aware, it meets WP:NFCC. -- Natural RX 02:49, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Just hoping for a bit of discretion when removing 'galleries' from bird-pages, they can be useful tools showing different plumages, races etc (this has been discussed at length on the WP:Birds Project in the past), although I agree that most are superfluous. Aviceda talk 09:32, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
See WP:IG and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds/archive_29#Gallery_Cleanup_usage "Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text (see WP:MOSIMAGES). However, the use of galleries may be appropriate in Wikipedia articles where a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images." Snowman ( talk) 14:58, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Would you kindly undelete everything that's redlinked on Portal:Country Music? Apparently someone didn't agree with my demolition of the portal. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:00, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi J Milburn,
You have tagged a
non-free image I uploaded to be {{non-free reduce}}d in size. I was unaware of the
policy on non-free image sizes. I should have been, and am now.
I've read over the relevant policy, as well as Thumbs but can't find a specific guideline about what the preferable size should be. (It appears to me that there is a de facto standard for book covers presented in articles of 200 px along the the longer side; reduction to that side would appear to be good common sense. However, if there is a guideline, I would most appreciate you pointing me to it.
As you can see
here, I have uploaded a number of similar images. Tagging them for reduction myself and then waiting for my own or other editors' action would appear to be at once both somewhat pointless and possibly rather
pointy. Once I know what I should do, please be assured
I'll rope, throw and brand 'em.
Thank you!
--
Shirt58 (
talk)
10:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) There's a fair use question at the copyright cleanup talk page that I think could benefit from an experienced review. If you have opportunity, would you mind helping out there? -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 18:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Big&Small edit 1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Makeemlighter (
talk)
22:58, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
|
For what it's worth, this is my ranking of the four "non-free" images in Divine Intervention (film) in order of get-riddability (least to most):
Just my 2¢. たろ人 ( talk) 23:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi JM, if you can find a first edition cover or similar that's free, by all means add it, but in the meantime I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't remove the image that's there. Or if you think it's not a legit fair use claim by all means propose it for deletion. But removing it, then claiming it should be deleted because it's not being used, isn't on. :) SlimVirgin TALK contribs 15:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Hiya... i felt compelled to sign in after i saw there was no image for the man who invented the television (and colour television), and i did ask another user but no luck. I happened to read your mention of wiki images on your home page.. and for one of the most important inventors in the 20th century Logie Baird not to have an image needs to be addressed. I'm completely new to wiki and have no idea whatsoever how to upload images, also i'm using someone elses computer. I'd be grateful if you could somehow see that this great man has his image up (also noticed Alan Turing needs an image as theres only a statue of him). Thanks. 1990Jessica ( talk) 15:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, per your suggestion I have removed the three questionable references. Is there anything else that you think needs to be done? -- Scorpion 0422 15:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
I've fixed the problems that you noted in your review, and the article is ready for another look. I know that you're away for another week, so I'll see you after the 30th, no rush. -- Pres N 19:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of April. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 200. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. Hope we can see you in April. |
– MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:42, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Mifter ( talk) 08:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Welcome back. I just spotted a new article, Clavarioid fungi. Thought you'd be interested. Chzz ► 01:22, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the note on the clavarioid article. No I haven't nominated it for anything...but feel free to do so, if you wish. RunningClam ( talk) 02:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I note you left a comment about taxa above the rank of genus not being italicized. There is no rule under the botanical code, but there is a recommendation in the preface to the current code http://ibot.sav.sk/icbn/main.htm that all taxa should be italicized: "As in the previous edition, scientific names under the jurisdiction of the Code, irrespective of rank, are consistently printed in italic type. The Code sets no binding standard in this respect, as typography is a matter of editorial style and tradition not of nomenclature. Nevertheless, editors and authors, in the interest of international uniformity, may wish to consider adhering to the practice exemplified by the Code, which has been well received in general and is followed in a number of botanical and mycological journals." If not to italicize is a Wikipedia thing, that's fine - though the movement is gradually towards italicizing all taxa. RunningClam ( talk) 18:35, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to work on this article. Please don't close the review yet. The leftorium 22:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
I think I'm done with the article now. Can you do another review? Thanks, The leftorium 22:28, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi - hope you've been well. Long time, no see. Just wondering; is the following article up to GA standard in your opinion? I rewrote it awhile back, but wasn't sure if it was up to GA standard. Obviously, it's too short to be nominated for FA, but I thought it might be GA standard given the fact the article is on a song by an underground (ish) metal band. LuciferMorgan ( talk) 11:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey there, I saw on your bio that you are willing to read over content and offer suggestions so if you could view the page I posted about jewelry designer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katey_Brunini. It got marked for speedy deletion because it was too "advertisey", could you make a suggestion of how to make it more creditable? ~~articulationagency —Preceding unsigned comment added by Articulationagency ( talk • contribs) 20:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Ucucha 00:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Are you going to work on this portal? -- Cirt ( talk) 00:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out at the backlog elimination drive. Just following up to see if you think MuZemike is done here or not? Cheers, hamiltonstone ( talk) 22:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
MickMacNee ( talk · contribs) has removed two sections from the talk page of the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash, claiming WP:NOTFORUM as a reason for the removal. I'm not sure whether this was a good edit or not. Whilst I agree that the talk page is not a forum, I think that on balance it may have been better to leave those sections in. Would you mind taking a look at the edit. I'm not looking to sanction MMN over the edit either case, just a review of the edit and maybe a reversal if it is felt that such reversal would be in order. If you feel the edits were fine then I don't have a problem with them either. Mjroots ( talk) 12:30, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The above mentioned file may have conflicted licensing. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image appears to have conflicted licensing Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Not conflicted licensing as such, but it's time that the only acceptable 'permission' was one to release under CC-BY-SA lodged with OTRS.
Otherwise such media is 'non-free', and needs to be treated as such REGARDLESS of what the publisher/uploader have agreed. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:06, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image may contain conflicted licensing. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
I received notification that there is a question about the copyright of this file. The file is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2. The license holder, Freemuse, specifies this on this page.
I would fix this myself, but I am not exactly sure how to go about it. Can you help? Thanks. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 16:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted media may have conflicted licensing Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
This public internet at high school. please do not respond to our talk page. -- 168.10.168.201 ( talk) 14:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to a another contributor with toolserv access there is now a 'partial' list of media with potentially 'conflicted licensing'
Link is : http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/reports/miss_tagged_files.txt
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Kaitlyn Maher at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
I can help with expanding the urls and citing the paragraphs; however, am a little concerned if it will pass
WP:Notability as now written. Any views on this is appreciated at the submission's entry. Kindly
Calmer
Waters
14:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
See comment in infobox... Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
J. I have reached the extent of my writing skills with this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pga1965/Kaitlyn_Maher and don't know how to lodge it. could you reply to my talk page please.
Pga1965 ( talk) 12:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Neal E. Boyd won that series, but Kaitlyn didn't make the final "5"
also I cannot find all of the authors for her songs, the album has been released digitally, but the physical release is set for dec 17, 2009.
Pga1965 ( talk) 23:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
ok moved to main wikipedia
Pga1965 ( talk) 06:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thanks 4 nomination
would you say the article is still a stub(i realise i did put that on myself)?
Pga1965 ( talk) 03:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
how do i protect the article from non-registered users changing things?
Pga1965 ( talk) 07:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
could you please review the wholesale changes being made to the article? 17 changes in 8 hours
Pga1965 ( talk) 03:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi. User:Xeno popped by my page looking for a copyvio admin. It is an image issue that touches on Wikipedia, Commons and WP:NFC, so you were the admin who immediately popped to my mind. :) The discussion at my talk page, User talk:Moonriddengirl#MRG to the rescue.21, links to the issues. This one has gotten pretty nasty and seems to be getting worse. Note the edit history of [1] and the new section at File_talk:Chicago_Spire.jpg#Dec_10.2C_2009.2C_third_dispute. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:54, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Sufficient rationale? Your view welcomed Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:27, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
As this was one I got rescued, I am slightly disapointed that someone's now tagged it as non-free. If it is non-free, I need some help in providing a rationale.
The user who tagged it as non-free , seems to to be applying policy a little literally on a number of other images as well (Check their contribs..). Perhaps you could tell that user to be a little bit more flexible? (Or at the very least notify the original uploaders?
I also note they rewrote some sourcing information on something else http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File:Lebanesearmyfirstflag.png&diff=prev&oldid=329879675 which IMO makes it less clear what the sourcing of the image/design is.
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey, JM, I know it sounds like I'd be the last person to comment on this, but, I thought in Wikimedia Commons that uploaded photos were supposed to have watermarks and photographers' names removed before using them. See here?: [2] Just wondering. Thanks.-- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 18:08, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
that can respond to User_talk:MBisanz#Images_on_Sugarcane_Grassy_Shoot_Disease_.28SCGS.29. MBisanz talk 06:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for ur reply. Please restore images of 'Sugarcane Grassy Shoot Disease'under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 license, as u suggested. I am OK with that. Thanks again.
Amityadav8 ( talk) 17:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 19:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Apologies for any duplicates to one previously reported. The following messages can be removed once read. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:15, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:15, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
This is regarding an oTRS issue on commons. Iv sent the permission email twice, but its not been updated yet. Iv had a bot msg re this on my talkpage today to follow up else the images may b deleted. How do u suggest I go bout this?
Thanks, Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 23:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks for the reply. The following images were included in the email:
1. Vadtal Showers.jpg
2. Vadtal.jpg
3. Vadtal Shikhar.jpg
4. Shree Swaminarayan Mandir.jpg
5. Jetalpur.jpg
6. Manaki Ghodi.jpg
7. Maharajshri.jpg
8. Acharya.jpg
9. Shri Swaminarayan Mandir.jpg
10. Shikhara.jpg
The email starts with "FOR THE ATTENTION OF OTRS PERMISSIONS".
Regards - Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 11:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. With regards to the three images in question, they are the property of the Swaminarayan Sampraday. The email permission has come from the official Swaminarayan Sampraday website, so I do not see the issue. Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 16:26, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
I really dont see the issue here. This is governed by Indian Law, where rights expire 70 years after the artist dies. Now, these paintings are probably well over 150 years old (they are portraits of the first Acharyas during their time in office - which was the first half of the 19th Century). The way it works is someone is hired to make a portrait - they make it, get the money for it and the portait is then owned by the temple (or Swaminarayan Sampraday organisation). At that time there was no real fuss bout rights and such stuff - I can confirm that whatever paintings are owned by the Swaminarayan Sampraday - it holds the rights for as well (where there are rights). Around The Globe सत्यमेव जयते 19:26, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 21:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 21:28, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:57, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 23:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 23:43, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 00:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 10:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 11:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The above noted image or media file appears to have conflicted licensing. As an image cannot be both 'free' and 'unfree', a check of the exact status of this media/image concerned is advised. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:07, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I found this on the en.Wikipedia, and think it belongs on Commons. Can you do this? [3] Thanks. -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 06:48, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Sfan00_IMG&oldid=333863567#December_2009
I can't work out what it refers to... , Surely you are allowed to remove speedy tags on images you tagged, but on reflection felt where NOT justified...
I am also needing a review of the caption cleanup in case I missed something.
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 20:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Caspian blue is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Xmas,
Eid,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hannukah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.
-- Caspian blue 21:56, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Amit Yadav 12:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amityadav8 ( talk • contribs)
Amityadav8 ( talk) 14:21, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks n regards, Amityadav8 ( talk) 16:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
word just in from AAO music, "Connie Talbot's Holiday Magic" DVD, has reached #1 on the music DVD charts in Hong Kong. see this thread for further info http://connietalbot.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=shawn1&action=display&thread=2717&page=1
Pga1965 ( talk) 10:39, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
J. could you also review my edits of connie talbots Holiday_Magic_(album) please.
Pga1965 ( talk) 12:13, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I realise this is a forum post, but it IS locked for exclusive postings from Shawn of AAO Music. Should I therefore ask him to include this information on the AAO website/news.
Pga1965 ( talk) 02:11, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi JM, I have a photographer from Turkey who is having trouble navigating her way through the red tape there. Since I don't speak any language close to hers, (I think she's exasperated), and finally sent me the photos (Of Ron Wood and Mick Jagger). I don't have an ORTIS account. She sent them photos in an email with the comments to please provide links to her name and photostream. Would it be possible to email them to you, and see if you can get them in? This language problem is getting to wear on me! Oh, please respond on my talk page, and I'll do the same here if you wiah. -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 21:28, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Well, I've had several Flickrmails with her, which I can copy and paste here.. and the last was this: (Title of email was) "My Ron Wood and Mick Jagger photos" Here are my photos... Please link them back to my flickr account and write my name under. Thanks, Eszter Turbéky So, that's the final comment. There were three; the first, was my contacting her, and she asked if there was any financial compensation. I told her no, but for those curious, they can click the photo and find her name and Flickr photostream. She wrote back saying that it was a pity, but she was willing for these two pics. When I tried to tell her how to change the license from copyright to CC-BY-SA, it became difficult for her, and that last response I sent you included an attachment of the two photos. What can I do? -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 22:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
It was worth a shot though. I will think hard and try and find an appropriate one. -- Kumioko ( talk) 14:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I missed that. I'll replace it now. Thanks for the heads up. Tiamut talk 18:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
As you were in the process of reverting my reversions, I was in the process of inserting rationale on the media page.
Although I appreciate you attention to this matter on the West Virginia basketball pages, and as an "administrator" I am sure you are much more well versed than me in Wikipedia policy, I do take issue with the manner by which you are trying to implement a precedent. I do not appreciate the passive aggressive tone you have taken with me. In my more than three years editing Wikipedia pages, I have never been treated like this (as you can see by the talk on my page, people seem to appreciate the work I do). As an "administrator", I would expect you to be more courteous and helpful in addressing things you see as in error, rather than micromanaging, especially when the concerns you raise are of a much broader consequence to the use of athletic team logos on Wikipedia pages in general.
So as to whether or not it is an "appropriate" use of non-free images. I think you would agree with me that, like all other athletic team pages (such as West Virginia Mountaineers men's basketball, which you also removed the logo from, most likely because there is no non-free rationale), the logo is an important component of the identity of the team, no matter whether it is a single season or the entire entity. That said, I disagree with your assessment that these sorts of pages are "discussing the team's performance in a certain year", rather they are building the identity for that team in a particular year. And so I'm arguing point 8 of the policy, that it is contextually significant, and is therefore an important component to the page itself. But if you disagree with me, then this gets to my other issue of the way you appear to be micromanaging. If you are going to remove the Flying WV logo from this page, then why not remove the logos from all the single season pages for all sports teams on Wikipedia? If you have a problem with the execution of drug pushers in China, then why are you focusing all your attention on a single executor, instead of working to establish and implement a universal standard? Sinisterminister ( talk) 19:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
On the contrary, I am taking liberties which I believe are most certainly within range of non-free use rationale. I do not believe I am disregarding this criteria in any way, especially not in spite of your handling of this situation, and believe that use of this logo is important to the identity of the team in all its forms. Again, I will refer you to this discussion: Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2009/October#Extent of non-free usage. If you have been too busy to read it, I suggest you do and get back to me in more explicit terms about why your judgement seems to contradict what was established in this discussion. Sinisterminister ( talk) 20:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I tagged some iamge for license/source issue. Uploader's complaining I didn't respond to their comments, I didn't get any comments other than the complaint... See User_talk:Sfan00_IMG and User_talk:S.S._Miami Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 10:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Are the licenses now satisfactory?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 00:32, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Done I have changed my flag to Dublin. Thanks for alerting me. Cargoking talk 11:32, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I was in need of a tag for the actual images, any suggestions? Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I have a number of food-related images of products, logos, organzations and other trademarked, copyrighted or otherwise non-free images I've uploaded to illustrate articles under the fair use rationale. Some of them were photos I took myself and some I found on flickr posted under CC-BY-2.0 licenses. Sfan00 IMG has let me know that a number of these have conflicting licensing tags, because they have both non-free notices/fair use rationales AND a free use license noted on the image page. Examples:
I thought the easy way to answer Sfan's concerns for photos I took myself was to remove my own GNU and CC licenses for the photos themselves, but I had another thought when I ran into one of my uploaded images on his list that I had found on flickr. I didn't take the photo, but the photographer had posted it with a CC-BY-2.0 attribution license, which means it could be used anywhere and in any way so long as the attribution (and the license) was included. I'm not comfortable removing someone else's license tag. So, it makes sense that the photo license be included and also the non-free tage and rationale as the subject matter depicts non-free material, such as an image of a product label.
As I thought about it, I noticed a note on Sfan's talk page from WhisperToMe regarding French licensing:
- in which there are two separate licenses, one for the photo itself and one for the content. That concept seems to perfectly sum up a photo taken of a trademarked or copyright-protected subject. I'm wondering if that is the correct approach to take regarding this specific type of product, logo or organization photo, whether or not French law is involved? It makes sense to me. What do you think? Thanks for the help. Geoff Who, me? 22:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
User:J Milburn has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Sfan00_IMG&diff=cur#.22Cannot_be_both_free_and_unfree.22
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 20:29, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, one last clarification. You said the good topic is eligible, but I can only claim the topic points for articles I worked on. In this particular good topic I'm hoping to work on, I was the primary author for all the articles, but of course, I did the work for most of them prior to this month. Can I still claim those if I do the good topic in January, or can I only claim the articles within the GT that I worked on in January? — Hunter Kahn ( c) 01:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
I created a possible tag for the image/media pages themselves as {{ Conflicted-license}}, Your opinions and possible cleanup to it would be appreciated before it's brought into active use. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 11:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, one last clarification. You said the good topic is eligible, but I can only claim the topic points for articles I worked on. In this particular good topic I'm hoping to work on, I was the primary author for all the articles, but of course, I did the work for most of them prior to this month. Can I still claim those if I do the good topic in January, or can I only claim the articles within the GT that I worked on in January? — Hunter Kahn ( c) 01:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
I created a possible tag for the image/media pages themselves as {{ Conflicted-license}}, Your opinions and possible cleanup to it would be appreciated before it's brought into active use. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 11:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Tagged by me, Uploader detagged... Retagged as it's Non-free.
Media concerned.. File:Wilsonville Spokesman newsbox.jpg
I don't want to have to 'keep' tagging it daily.. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
It seems the {{ conflicted license}} and the user notification is having the desired impact, 6 of the images tagged and notified have already had the conflicts resolved :)
There's been a disscusion started about it at, Wikipedia_talk:Image_copyright_tags#.7B.7BConflicted-license.7D.7D as well.
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 18:44, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I am completely certain that I will be eliminated in the 1st round because I don't understand the rules and haven't developed any strategy. In addition, I have a self imposed wikibreak for a few days at the beginning of every month so I that will remain interested in Wikipedia. That's my fault, not anyone else's.
Question 1. I think I know how to apply for points. Just edit this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special%3APrefixIndex&prefix=WikiCup%2FHistory%2F2010%2FSubmissions&namespace=4 according to the templates here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiCup/Submissions
___ a. No, you are an idiot
___ b. Correct, but you are still an idiot.
Question 2. You get points from making an article GA or FA, right? The other things like featured sounds, I never do (maybe a thing I should learn). No points for article improvement where the article is not a FAC or GAC.
___ a. Correct.
___ b. No, correct description is _________
Question 3. What is the criteria for a FA wikicup credit? Is it just reasonably significant contributions or is there a technical criteria, like number of edits?
I can think of 20 other questions but this is enough to get me started so that I won't be a fool with zero points. Maybe if there is a 2011 Wikicup, I can write the simple English translation? Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 21:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello J.Milburn
I've just signed up to WikiProject Sharks and was wondering if you, as another participant of the project, would know where I could find good coverage to expand two shark stubs that I've just created.
Orectolobus floridus Orectolobus reticulatus
Also, if there is anything I've done wrong, can you please let me know. Thanks. -- Domestic CAT 21:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I've left a similar message to the user you suggested.-- Domestic CAT 22:36, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I've gone and mainspaced this and listed at DYK. Any improvements would be appreciated. I'm still trying to get a free image too. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Somebody took my name off. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3AWikiCup%2FHistory%2F2010%2FContestants&action=historysubmit&diff=335790993&oldid=335779950 Please add it like you did with User:Grandiose. I am meek, not grandiose.
Note the time stamp. I asked to join before User:Grandiose did. I asked here. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Contestants&diff=prev&oldid=335779950 User:Grandiose asked 2 hours later. So I ask if I can be granted an addition to the list. If you want to slam the door shut after those who asked after User:Grandiose's request, I will not object since I qualify as an earlier request. JB50000 ( talk) 04:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I know that you are probably not involved in WikiProject Cats at all but you might be able to answer this:
See British Longhair.
I noticed an unsourced claim about an appearance in a cat food commercial. I've tagged it with "citation needed", but I don't believe (even if true) that mentions of appearances that cats of a certain breed have had in cat food commercials holds any encyclopedic value whatsoever. i was about to just remove it immediatley, but decided to seek a second opinion, just in case these sorts of claims are (by Wikipedia standards of course), of an encyclopedic nature. Thoughts?-- Domestic CAT 05:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Was there an OTRS confirmation on this image?
I am having the uploader moan at me because it was tagged for no rationale, will read over the image again, but appreciate a second opinion. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I'd just to thank you for completing my application for the WikiCup. I was relying on the goodwill of people like you to be accepted, and I'm very glad to have found.it. Germany is fine. Thanks again. Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 16:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- FASTILY (TALK) 04:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. Of course I don't want ! I prefer Canada which is not taken. If it becomes taken today, then alternative choices are Brazil then Chile. JB50000 ( talk) 05:19, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Darn, figured it would be okay because it wasn't actually featured on the mainpage until well into the new year. Never mind, hopefully there will be plenty more where that came from. Just FYI, I am being credited with the 10 points on the scoring page, I don't want to edit my score given the potential for drama and tomfoolery, but someone probably should remove it then. Cheers, Lankiveil ( speak to me) 09:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC).
Surely, the copyright on these images of old coins belongs to the photographer, and seeing as we have no evidence of release from the photographer, they should be deleted? J Milburn ( talk) 17:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
For your input in the West Virginia logo discussion. I trust that the ensuing conversation helped to answer your questions. If not, please visit my talk page. — BQZip01 — talk 02:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Why did you give me a warning? It seems as though the image I uploaded is just as good as any other image. I think it's acceptable. And make sure no one deletes it again without even telling why.
( S.S. Miami ( talk) 22:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC))
Hi, J Milburn. No problem about the gallery removal ( my gallery edit to Amanita muscaria). I can understand the reasoning behind not wanting articles to accumulate pictures in a gallery section. I do think that gallerys can be useful and that this article might benefit from one but I'm not going to press my point. Is there anywhere in the MoS that discusses this? Jason Quinn ( talk) 23:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Opinions?, I have had someone revert my 'conflicted' tagging of this? Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Hiya, User:Sfan00 IMG suggested I talk to you to resolve this issue. He tagged the image File:Unoabjd.jpg with {{ conflicted-license}}, but previous threads at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions suggest that free images of copyrighted sculptures/toys should be tagged with dual licenses: [6] [7]. Thank you for any input you have on this. Siawase ( talk) 11:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) There's a question on my user page about photographs of mobile phones. If you get a chance, could you come weigh in there? I'd be most grateful. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
the 2009 Togo national football team attack redirection should be deleted. The attack happened in 2010, not 2009-- 121.33.190.164 ( talk) 13:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Me again; sorry. :D I've just closed out a multiple image infringement case, and within minutes of my deleting File:MorganSquare.jpg, the image was returned to the article, having been uploaded by a brand new user at File:Spartanburg square.jpg. I do not know if we have the same contributor socking on Wikipedia (since s/he is now indef-blocked on English Wikipedia (and I've just put all of his or her images up for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Akhenaton06. I wonder if a sock investigation is appropriate...or even possible given how little QCdue has done.
In any event, I need to draw the attention of a Commons admin to the new upload and was hoping you'd have time to tag it or delete it or do whatever seems appropriate. It seems highly unlikely that the actual copyright holder just showed up to put it back at this specific point in time, but I do not have the original to point to (though it is used at myriad points around the web). -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
About the WikiBowl Silver, I see you don't want it on the WikiCup page. If you can notify the losers that there is a way to keep playing, that would be thoughtful. People still in WikiCup should not feel threatened as they earned more points. Having the chance to still play, but at the kid's table, not the adult table may encourage the losers to keep writing! JB50000 ( talk) 06:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
User_talk:Sfan00_IMG#File:Rochester_Midtown_Plaza_-_Interior.jpg Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 18:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm not being unreasonable am I? Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I've been going through some of my previous image work and found some stuff uploaded by this user:
The first two (based on the claims given) were transfered to Commons, (Tineye gave no results BTW)
I then found these, which had no description:
So I went to the uploaders talk page to leave an appropriate request, when I found that you had left them a slightly stronger worded message in relation to thier images in 2008 User_talk:Sureshiras#A_general_note_on_your_uploads...
Perhaps given that you found some problems previously you could review the 4 above along with :
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
This image is claimed to have a fair use rationale? Agree? Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Re: [8], thanks for helping to straighten that out. Powers T 03:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
The WikiCup got me looking through "my" old articles, thinking which ones to improve, and I realised that Roystonea regia was pretty close to what I might put up for a GA candidate. Not that this has any bearing on whether I put it up or not, but I was wondering whether this is significant enough "new" work (2010 work) to make eligible for consideration for WikiCup points. Just trying to get a sense of what might constitute "significant" work. Guettarda ( talk) 05:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Guettarda ( talk) 14:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
J. I understand Connie is not her real name. someone mentioned it is Constance Victoria Talbot. I don't know how I would verify that. obviously she is known as Connie.
Pga1965 ( talk) 13:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I recommended retagging, but disagree with your reasoning. You may wish to read my response at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_January_15#File:WorcsCoatArms.jpg. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 14:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Great_Britain_Snowy.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Makeemlighter (
talk)
18:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
|
I found I'd tagged the following for Commons move back in late 2008, On review I'm not so sure some of them can go on Commons...
Can you take a look over and tag accordingly?
Thanks in advance...
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 21:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing the article for me. Just to let you know, I have addressed your concerns, so if you could take another look at it, I'd appreciate it. -- Scorpion 0422 19:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I reffered the following to WP:PUI,
The uploader subsequently clarified the situation and I'm not sure they are now a PUI issue...
I think only admins can close PUI threads? So your advice would be appreciated, as well as any you can give to the uploader. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 20:37, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Hey JM, I uploaded a photo of Ben Taylor, and the photographer is Sean Rowe, with whom I have a good relationship. The photo came from Flickr. (Ben is BTW the son of James Taylor, etc.) Anyway, there's a woman performing in the photo next to him-- I believe Sean took it at a festival in the UK. Neither I nor Suede67 who I asked to crop the photo know who she is, and I emailed Sean and he didn't either. My request to crop her out of the photo just to show Ben was cheerily approved by the photographer. The image is in the infobox for Ben Taylor's article, so you can find it easily. My problem, is that someone came along afterward and either uploaded or placed the original photo back in Wikimedia Commons above the original and the cropped one. Nobody asked me why it was cropped, or mentioned what they were doing. With a 2.0 Creative Commons license and permission from the photographer, what can I do so that just his photo is in the freaking infobox? (Sorry, I'm Cranky... earache, infected). You are my best bridge between the two worlds of Wikipedia and Commons, so if you can help, or have advice, would you leave a note on my en.Wikipedia talk page please? Thanks. -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 23:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I was planning to try and help clear some of the backlog here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_reports/Non-free_files_missing_a_rationale
I would strongly welcome any reasonable challange you have to any I add. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
So what? So this...
Firstly: I'm assuming that you know that Paul Levitz, high profile (former) publisher of DC Comics rose through the ranks from comics fanzines...? That he was publisher/editor of et cetera, and took over the premiere fanzine of the day The Comic Reader - and continued to publish it after being hired by DC. That after he was hired by DC, he was one of those tasked with putting together their in-house fanzine The Amazing World of DC Comics - part-response to Marvel's FOOM (itself the successor to the out-of-house club/publication Marvelmania), part reaction to the professionalisation of amateur fanzines and an attempt to both jump on the bandwagon and get previews/behind-the-scenes/articles/biographies out to DC's fanbase. Levitz was one of the 'Junior woodchucks' (alongside Bob 'The Answer Man' Rozakis and others) who produced TAWODC, before rising to become Jenette Kahn's V.P. (by 1986 - can't date his promotion exactly at the present), and later President.
So what? So Levitz's histoy as a fan - indeed a BNF ("big name" fan) is integral to his subsequent career as editor/writer/VP/President for and of DC Comics. So his history as writer of fanzine articles and publisher of important fanzines is crucial both to his having been hired by DC, and his being involved in AWODC - iself one of the most important "pro-zines" (with FOOM and CBG and TCJ and the rest of them). Arguable, without Levitz's association with The Comic Reader, the subsequent chain that led him to Presidency of DC Comics might not have started. So his fanzine days are very important. Critically important, even.
He wasn't an artist, so while a cover of et cetera (published by Levitz) would fit adequately to illustrate this part of his career trajectory, it might potentially be confusing to... somebody. However, since the 'Junior woodchucks' were caricatured by Dave Manak in AWODC #13, this image serves - in the words of my edit (above) - to illustrate Levitz in his guise as "a prominent fan, fanzine publisher, contributor and subsequent [read: "future"] professional."
You queried whether I have read the non-free content criteria; I have. I'll briefly comment on the policy points:
There's palpably no edit war - I scanned this image from my own personal collection and amended the page in MAY 2008, to no obvious contention/disagreement from anyone until yourself, six days ago. Having been largely absent from here for a considerable time, I noticed this issue only today, and reinstated the image with what I felt was a reasonable - if necessarily brief - rationale. That it was moderately-swiftly redacted by Nightscream (who appeared to misinterpret my association of "prominent fan" - i.e. Paul Levitz not Dave Manak) might be construed as the begininngs of an edit war - since no reasonable attempt was made pre-redaction to contact me and ask for my reasoning (now lengthy reasoning!) in reinstating it... but there's no edit war and no ignoring of the rules. Hopefully this will, however, clarify things. :o) ntnon ( talk) 04:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Your thoughts welcomed: User:Sfan00_IMG/Sandbox Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
The situation is quite unclear. See here for a discussion, and the image page for more details. I'm currently trying to find the photographer. SlimVirgin TALK contribs 21:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Done! Thanks for your review. While I'm here, thought I'd mention that I'm thinking about bringing several of the B-class Lactarius articles you wrote to GAN this year... when I do, shall I put you as co-nom? Sasata ( talk) 01:33, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, as you pointed out my Wikicup flag is not free-licensed, please give me a random flag. Thanks J04n( talk page) 02:02, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
File:Miami Florida city flag.svg is my flag. Thanks Secret account 13:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm fine with a random flag...thanks, Sabiona ( talk) 14:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just alerting you that your concerns are all fixed. Feel free to check back in whenever you like, and thanks for the review! :) The Flash {talk} 02:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello J Milburn/archive28, you have received this notice because you have placed your name on the list of members of WikiProject Metal. We are currently looking to make the wikiproject more active, and in doing so, we need to have a list of active members on the wikiproject. If you wish to stay an active part of wikiproject metal, please add your username to Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Active Users. Conversely, if you wish to leave the wikiproject, please remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Members. Thank you. |
Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Sfan00+IMG
I am trying to update some older fair use rationales..
Most of it's straightforward film posters/covers, but there's quite a lot of them still to do...
The screenshots and publicity stills using the rationales I'm updating will need a different approach.. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I recently undid an edit you made on the Sarah Palin page and I started a section on the talk page at "Inclusion or exclusion of File:GoingRogue.jpg" to discuss the merits for including or excluding the image. I was wondering if you could respond on the talk page so that the matter could be discussed? Chhe ( talk) 01:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Fail it it can not be expanded. -- Saint Pedrolas J. Hohohohohoh merry christmas 01:03, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for another review! Sasata ( talk) 03:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, can you delete all my HK22 pages. (I.E User:HK22/Sig) thanks. HK22 ( talk) 05:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the review and the barnstar! I wasn't thinking about FAC before, but you've inspired me to give it a shot! -- Pres N 03:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Do you have any idea of where or how to display a friendly message to attract quorum to the valued pictures? I mean, I don´t really care much about that little box top-right, I just want to do something because I consider the reviews/consensus in the valued piecture candidates is low. - ☩ Damërung ☩ . -- 03:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
You tagged File:Slide 1.jpg and File:Slide 2.jpg for deletion (or someone else did). I'm very happy you brought this to my notice. Actually, I created this file (in the sense, I captured it live). Can you tell me how to add the source information for these two files? I'm a little new to these things.
Thanx,
Ankitbhatt ( talk) 11:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanx again,
Ankitbhatt ( talk) 09:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I won't be able to get to the concerns just yet unfortunately (my computer got hit by the Blue Screen of Death) but I'll get to them as soon as I have immediate access to the internet. Cheers, The Flash {talk} 21:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
The Wikicup is a nice idea. I did not plan strategy so I am certain that I will not win. However, a win for me is if articles get written and I progress to the 2nd round without resorting to any tricks or even strategy. Even if I am eliminated, it is not a total loss as I have more than zero points now. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 19:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) We have a question at WT:CP about the handling of a 1902 painting on Commons. I believe I've addressed it correctly, but as I am not as firm in my footing on image questions as text and only really just beginning to get somewhat comfortable on Commons, I would very much appreciate your review, if you get a chance. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi! In regards to the AF headquarters, I visited CDG and got a shot of the AF headquarters from a different viewpoint:
In regards to the one currently here:
Which one do you think is a better illustration of the Air France headquarters? If you think the new one is better, I'll replace the old one with the new one. WhisperToMe ( talk) 16:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
You blocked this user back in September for uploading copyrighted/improperly licensed images. They are asking for unblock now. There may be a WP:COMPETENCE issue here, but they seem to at least understand why they were blocked. I was thinking of giving them a chance to prove it, but I'm checking in with you as blocking admin first. Beeblebrox ( talk) 19:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
A reply to your request at the Graphic Lab has been made. Please view the reply here. Cheers, Mononomic ( talk) 20:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Mr. Milburn,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Morchella conica 1 beentree.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 8, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-02-08. howcheng { chat} 08:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
I am not at all impressed by your arbitrary removal of a non-free file from this article. If you—as an uninvolved editor—have a problem with this file's rationale, then discuss it first on the article's talk page. Parrot of Doom 12:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Biological warfare. I have addressed all of your concerns, and responded there. Perhaps you could have another look? Cirt ( talk) 16:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I hope you did notice that I actually have addressed many of your concerns. (It did kinda sorta feel like an oppose... :( ) Cirt ( talk) 19:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Alright, I finally took care of everything at the GAR. :) The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 17:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Upon meditation I realised than I need to know your opinion on the following. Although most wartime photos are not in PD in Russia, they are in PD in some other post-Soviet states. Although Russia claimed to be a legal successor of the USSR, I am not sure if it automatically means that Russian copyright law covers all Eastern Front photos throughout the world. How this situation should be treated in your opinion?-- Paul Siebert ( talk) 20:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello J Miblurn, I hope you would be interested in a possible BLP contest. I would be happy to help in any way. Okip (formerly Ikip) 17:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Am I being unreasonable in tagging?
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
File:Ustreammainlogo.png File:Ustreamlogo.jpg File:Justintv-logo.png File:Kotakusc.JPG
I've now hit 3RR on them :( Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh that's nice you choose me when there's lots of images why don't you just take down this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cena-STFU-07_2.jpg it's clearly not made by him Kreyg Talk 03:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Sfan00_IMG&diff=cur#SPAM
Since when is leaving messages requesting more information, SPAM?
Can you have a word with the user concerned, as I am suspecting a misunderstanding on their or my part.
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 11:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I've completed the vectorization: let me know what you think. Mononomic ( talk) 01:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I'm in a dispute with User:Paul Siebert over some World War II images on the Censorship of images in the Soviet Union article. Like I've spelled out on the talk page, I feel that these two images, reichstag with two Watchs and reichstag with one Watch should be allowed in the image. I feel this way because while they are non-free images they can't be replaced by free images and they demonstrate what was being censored out by Khaldei. As per WP:NFCC's clause #8 the images should be used because they significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and their omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Anyway I just want to get your opinion on if I have a case. -- Esemono ( talk) 23:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the support at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Biological warfare. Do you think your comments above in that page could be collapsed using hat/hab? Cirt ( talk) 20:08, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Further to our conversations about a year ago. Can I request the un-deletion of the following files- As you we see, they are no longer orphans and will be used in the info boxes of the following articles. I could upload them again Commonist is a wonderful thing- but I would then lose the file history and need to reproduce the Fair use statements, of which I don't possess a copy.
I see you are rather busy at the moment, I will leave this a week and if you can't get back to me- I'll post this request elsewhere. Thanks in advance -- ClemRutter ( talk) 14:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
As for Category:Textile mills in Lancashire, I don't consider myself an expert- but in wiki terms I probably know more than most, and my set up does allow me to generate Start class articles reasonable quickly (2 a day maybe). My focus has been with spinning, and the LCC mills in particular but Horrockses is in my list. Weaving sheds are lower down the list principally due to my lack of source material. The best starting point is
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (
link).I have added the portal to at least one mill, and both the Coppull mills are in the category. Now I must get back to real life Tescos beckons. -- ClemRutter ( talk) 20:32, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
A further five if you could be so kind
-- ClemRutter ( talk) 21:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Here are a further batch when you have a moment
I have definitely broken the back of the LCC mills. The aim was to get an established format and a substantial body of articles written ṕour encouragér les autres. -- ClemRutter ( talk) 18:39, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
This is the last batch- Iḿ off for a wiki-detox. There are a few Lancashire Mills here, but you are most welcome to add a few more. Until I do an expedition up to the ice flows of Bailrigg, I just can't get hold of the reference books I need and it is pointless struggling when there is so much more to do. -- ClemRutter ( talk) 21:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey. Looks like all the concerns have been addressed, so it can be re-looked at. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Mr. Milburn,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Morelasci.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on February 24, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-02-24. howcheng { chat} 22:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Is the edit any better? -- Muhammad (talk) 16:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Dustbin Baby- April in the graveyard.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Makeemlighter (
talk)
01:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
|
I thought you might be interested in this discussion about whether ships partly built in Cumbria (and Lancashire) come under the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria. Nev1 ( talk) 20:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey dude, I need to talk to you on IRC about the Cup when you get a chance. Hope to catch you tomorrow. — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 03:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I just got on to do the tiebreakers before work, but you've already done them; sorry about that. Yesterday was busier than I thought it was going to be; I managed to get on twice for like five minutes each. :/ I should be on tonight after 5pm CST. — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 15:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Good morning. :) I have a question about a Commons image; hope you can help out. As there's no freedom of panorama in France, how are we to determine the copyright status of the sign depicted in File:Orglandes War Cemetery 00.JPG? It was clearly created at some point after 1961 because of the text on it but the precise date is not stated. It's obviously uploaded in good faith, but if the text on the sign is under copyright, the image is a derivative work. Should this be tagged? With what? :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
;) Just kidding. — Hun ter Ka hn 22:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Round one is over, and round two has begun! Congratulations to the 64 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our first round. A special well done goes to Sasata ( submissions), our round one winner (1010 points), and to Hunter Kahn ( submissions) and TonyTheTiger ( submissions), who were second and third respectively (640 points/605 points). Sasata was awarded the most points for both good articles (300 points) and featured articles (600 points), and TonyTheTiger was awarded the most for featured topics (225 points), while Hunter Kahn claimed the most for good topics (70). Staxringold ( submissions) claimed the most featured lists (240 points) and featured pictures (35 points), Geschichte ( submissions) claimed the most for Did you know? entries (490 points), Jujutacular ( submissions) claimed the most for featured sounds (70 points) and Candlewicke ( submissions) claimed the most for In the news entries (40 points). No one claimed a featured portal or valued picture.
Credits awarded after the end of round one but before round two may be claimed in round two, but remember the rule that content must have been worked on in some significant way during 2010 by you for you to claim points. The groups for round two will be placed up shortly, and the submissions' pages will be blanked. This round will continue until 28 April, when the top two users from each group, as well as 16 wildcards, will progress to round three. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup; thank you to all doing this last round, and particularly to those helping at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot ( talk) at 00:48, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I was sick over the weekend, so I didn't get your message about WikiCup. I have responded on the talk page. It appears that, right at the end, one of my articles passed GA. See Talk:Henry Martin Tupper. -- Jayron 32 17:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I've replied but I doubt that Imatt would ever listen to any compromise-- Coldplay Expért Let's talk 21:58, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Keep Calm and Carry On Poster.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Maedin\
talk
07:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
|
Awesome, sounds like a win-win for everyone :-). Thanks for letting me know! Lankiveil ( speak to me) 09:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC).
but it is a free image, the author had given permission to me. there is the conversation between me (as varg) and the author (sorry, in turkish): http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/328/87430308.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infestor ( talk • contribs) 16:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi J Milburn, I've heard that you're one of our resident Image-OTRS experts. Would you mind taking a look at User_talk:Toon05#claimed_otrs_permission and the relevant image if you have the time? Unfortunately I don't have a ticket number for you. Cheers – Toon 19:03, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi JMilburn,
Greek Orthodox Church of the Annunciation has yet to appear on the main page, though its been nominated. I should mention that the same is true for two articles I listed in the first round of Wikicup ( Sharafat, East Jerusalem and Mujir al-Din al-'Ulaymi). If I should not be listing things until after they are approved for the main page, please let me know. I've been adding them as a I nom them, so as not to have to go dig up the nom diffs later. Sorry for any confusion. You might want to revise my first round point total to 110, and I'll relist the two articles I mentioned along with the church one in this one once they are appear on the main page. Thanks. Tiamut talk 16:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Your reasoning for deleting the above-mentioned image is false and at best weak! My copyright statement was accurate at the time of writing it; it remains accurate at this very moment that I am writing this message. You cannot take such action as you have taken on the basis of possible future events! When a free image turns up, by all means feel free and replace the present image with the free one; not until this has happened can you remove the present image on the basis of your false argument! --BF 17:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
You seem to have decided to make your presence felt! Go and look into the history of the file! The matter has already been discussed in detail earlier! (Talk with User:Feydey, and he will be able to tell you about the details. You may begin here). The person who has put the photograph on Persian Wikipedia owns the photograph and I have used exactly his desired copyright statement. If you cannot read Persian, seek some help from someone who can. Finally, please leave me in peace! I feel unable to live peacefully with those who embark on vendetta. If there is anything to be done, let that be done by Stifle. Incidentally, I told you earlier about my desire that the matter with regard to Michael Foot be dealt with by Stifle, but for some mysterious reason, you behaved compulsively by leaving message after message on my talk page on every single word that I wrote for Stifle, disregarding the very fundamental principle that my correspondence with someone else is my correspondence with someone else and you are not supposed to spy on them. Had you any relevant point, you had had to discuss them separately with Stifle, and I would not spy on your correspondence with him --- I had already unequivocally told you that I had no desire, none whatsoever, to discuss the matter with you. Now I hope that this is the last time we hear from each other. It was no pleasure knowing you! Please have the sensitivity to appreciate that in the course of the past ten hours or so you have overtaxed my patience, far in excess of what I am normally capable of tolerating (just count the number of the unsolicited messages that you have left on my talk page, after my explicit statement that I would leave the matter to Stifle to handle --- for some reason you could not help forcing yourself on me, that you were such an important and indispensable person here on Wikipedia and that you were always so right and ....). Now, please let this nightmare be over. --BF 02:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry for the mither, but would it be possible to check that this OTRS ticket applies to File:Delahoya1.jpg. Cheers. The uploader maintains that Mr Newton has a long-standing, and automatic open licensing for his images on WP. This ticket is linked to on about half a dozen images or so and the uploader just placed it on an image I tagged for no copyright or permission. Many thanks. -- Fred the Oyster ( talk) 21:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I made an alternate at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Desargues theorem.svg to account for the mistake in the original, would you be able to re-evaluate? Jujutacular T · C 23:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Cirt ( talk) 06:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I have put up an edit at the nomination. I would appreciate your feedback -- Muhammad (talk) 10:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Well there's not much point in saying that Cumbria needs more quality articles if I don't then do something about it, so what do you think of this? I've put it up at WP:GAC, but have an eye on FAC (one of the perennial problems with the articles I take to FAC is that I can't see problems with my own prose, so GAC should help smooth out some of the issues and the enforced break due to the backlog should allow me to approach the prose with fresh eyes later). The layout section needs finishing, but there's no rush at GAC, and I should be able to take care of it either tonight or tomorrow. The article touches on some pretty important parts of the region's history such as the Anglo-Scottish Wars, and hopefully makes for interesting reading. The main source I've been working from is a bit dense so an outside opinion on how the article comes across would be very welcome. Hopefully soon there'll be another article for the Cumbria portal's showcase, and perhaps at some point a mainpage appearance for WP:L&C. Nev1 ( talk) 21:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Can you copy the POTD blurb to the unprotected version? I can't keep up. -- tariqabjotu 00:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for commenting at Template_talk:Did_you_know#List_of_New_York_Legislature_members_expelled_or_censured. Please see also a discussion about that particular DYK nomination on WT:DYK, at Wikipedia_talk:DYK#DYK_hook_about_fact_of_history_from_over_200_years_ago. Thank you for your time, Cirt ( talk) 20:26, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Can you elaborate why you removed File:Eileen Olexiuk.jpg and File:Colvin testimony.jpg from Canadian Afghan detainee issue? As far as I'm aware, it meets WP:NFCC. -- Natural RX 02:49, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Just hoping for a bit of discretion when removing 'galleries' from bird-pages, they can be useful tools showing different plumages, races etc (this has been discussed at length on the WP:Birds Project in the past), although I agree that most are superfluous. Aviceda talk 09:32, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
See WP:IG and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds/archive_29#Gallery_Cleanup_usage "Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text (see WP:MOSIMAGES). However, the use of galleries may be appropriate in Wikipedia articles where a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images." Snowman ( talk) 14:58, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Would you kindly undelete everything that's redlinked on Portal:Country Music? Apparently someone didn't agree with my demolition of the portal. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:00, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi J Milburn,
You have tagged a
non-free image I uploaded to be {{non-free reduce}}d in size. I was unaware of the
policy on non-free image sizes. I should have been, and am now.
I've read over the relevant policy, as well as Thumbs but can't find a specific guideline about what the preferable size should be. (It appears to me that there is a de facto standard for book covers presented in articles of 200 px along the the longer side; reduction to that side would appear to be good common sense. However, if there is a guideline, I would most appreciate you pointing me to it.
As you can see
here, I have uploaded a number of similar images. Tagging them for reduction myself and then waiting for my own or other editors' action would appear to be at once both somewhat pointless and possibly rather
pointy. Once I know what I should do, please be assured
I'll rope, throw and brand 'em.
Thank you!
--
Shirt58 (
talk)
10:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) There's a fair use question at the copyright cleanup talk page that I think could benefit from an experienced review. If you have opportunity, would you mind helping out there? -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 18:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
File:Big&Small edit 1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Makeemlighter (
talk)
22:58, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
|
For what it's worth, this is my ranking of the four "non-free" images in Divine Intervention (film) in order of get-riddability (least to most):
Just my 2¢. たろ人 ( talk) 23:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi JM, if you can find a first edition cover or similar that's free, by all means add it, but in the meantime I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't remove the image that's there. Or if you think it's not a legit fair use claim by all means propose it for deletion. But removing it, then claiming it should be deleted because it's not being used, isn't on. :) SlimVirgin TALK contribs 15:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Hiya... i felt compelled to sign in after i saw there was no image for the man who invented the television (and colour television), and i did ask another user but no luck. I happened to read your mention of wiki images on your home page.. and for one of the most important inventors in the 20th century Logie Baird not to have an image needs to be addressed. I'm completely new to wiki and have no idea whatsoever how to upload images, also i'm using someone elses computer. I'd be grateful if you could somehow see that this great man has his image up (also noticed Alan Turing needs an image as theres only a statue of him). Thanks. 1990Jessica ( talk) 15:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, per your suggestion I have removed the three questionable references. Is there anything else that you think needs to be done? -- Scorpion 0422 15:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
I've fixed the problems that you noted in your review, and the article is ready for another look. I know that you're away for another week, so I'll see you after the 30th, no rush. -- Pres N 19:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of April. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 200. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. Hope we can see you in April. |
– MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:42, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Mifter ( talk) 08:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Welcome back. I just spotted a new article, Clavarioid fungi. Thought you'd be interested. Chzz ► 01:22, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the note on the clavarioid article. No I haven't nominated it for anything...but feel free to do so, if you wish. RunningClam ( talk) 02:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I note you left a comment about taxa above the rank of genus not being italicized. There is no rule under the botanical code, but there is a recommendation in the preface to the current code http://ibot.sav.sk/icbn/main.htm that all taxa should be italicized: "As in the previous edition, scientific names under the jurisdiction of the Code, irrespective of rank, are consistently printed in italic type. The Code sets no binding standard in this respect, as typography is a matter of editorial style and tradition not of nomenclature. Nevertheless, editors and authors, in the interest of international uniformity, may wish to consider adhering to the practice exemplified by the Code, which has been well received in general and is followed in a number of botanical and mycological journals." If not to italicize is a Wikipedia thing, that's fine - though the movement is gradually towards italicizing all taxa. RunningClam ( talk) 18:35, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to work on this article. Please don't close the review yet. The leftorium 22:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
I think I'm done with the article now. Can you do another review? Thanks, The leftorium 22:28, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi - hope you've been well. Long time, no see. Just wondering; is the following article up to GA standard in your opinion? I rewrote it awhile back, but wasn't sure if it was up to GA standard. Obviously, it's too short to be nominated for FA, but I thought it might be GA standard given the fact the article is on a song by an underground (ish) metal band. LuciferMorgan ( talk) 11:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey there, I saw on your bio that you are willing to read over content and offer suggestions so if you could view the page I posted about jewelry designer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katey_Brunini. It got marked for speedy deletion because it was too "advertisey", could you make a suggestion of how to make it more creditable? ~~articulationagency —Preceding unsigned comment added by Articulationagency ( talk • contribs) 20:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Ucucha 00:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Are you going to work on this portal? -- Cirt ( talk) 00:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out at the backlog elimination drive. Just following up to see if you think MuZemike is done here or not? Cheers, hamiltonstone ( talk) 22:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
MickMacNee ( talk · contribs) has removed two sections from the talk page of the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash, claiming WP:NOTFORUM as a reason for the removal. I'm not sure whether this was a good edit or not. Whilst I agree that the talk page is not a forum, I think that on balance it may have been better to leave those sections in. Would you mind taking a look at the edit. I'm not looking to sanction MMN over the edit either case, just a review of the edit and maybe a reversal if it is felt that such reversal would be in order. If you feel the edits were fine then I don't have a problem with them either. Mjroots ( talk) 12:30, 12 April 2010 (UTC)