![]() | 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. |
Talk page • Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 • Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 • Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 • Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12
Hello ww2censor. The article Knut Glomsaas seems to be a translated and partially rephrased excerpt from the reference provided. All the facts contained in the article is also included in the reference, which is an article ( Google translation) from the Trondheim-based newspaper Adresseavisen. Could this be a copyright violation? Would it also be one if the text or an excerpt of it were retold from memory in one's own words? The subject's notability has also been disputed. He is mentioned in Store norske leksikon in the article about military music as a well-known military musician. He also has an entry in Cappelens musikkleksikon (Cappelen's encyclopedia of music). I would think this indicates he is notable in the Norwegian Wikipedias, but I wonder if he is in the English one. What would you think? Iceblock ( talk) 13:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Randall here, the error was with the computer not me. I finally got the link to work. This is free material, and it very good as a reference. In fact i,am getting ready to put up more References on him. Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Randall O ( talk • contribs) 20 May 2009
The stamp image file:SteinbeckStamp.JPG is now used to illustrate just one thing in the article: the fact that he was honored with a postage stamp. Fair enough? S B H arris 06:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
It appears that you're unfamiliar with U.S. copyright law. By law, anything produced by the U.S. federal government cannot be copyrighted. See United States copyright law. Ergo, the Steinbeck stamp, which was produced by the U.S. government, is not copyrighted. So please end the battle over a non-existent copyright. -- Sift& Winnow 21:21, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Apologies for the delay in replying but I had to search for some links and also been busy the last few days. A fuller rational for deletion follows below:
In most instance where stamps are not being used correctly in biographic article, removal of the stamp from the article and then marking as an orphan has been efficient but I have no problem in discussion this in depth and even bring it to WP:IfD where more expert editors can weigh in. If no reliable third parties have written about the stamp in relation to John Steinbeck himself then it should not be included and we may even be supporting original research by assigning the stamp some importance in the biography.
The improper use of non-free stamp images has been discussed at various places before and deletion sweeps have been made to remove such uses, including those in some rather high profile people's biographies. These administrator noticeboard discussions prove this is an ongoing problem that needs addressing regularly: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive54#Stamps wrongly claimed as Fair use: serious copyright problem, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive59#Fair use stamps: revisitied ..., Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive62#Orphaned non-free stamp images and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive165#Invalid fair use of stamps: Admin.2Fbot action required. This January 2008 IfD page clearly demonstrated that even though some editors disagreed with the deletion nominations, many being used in raher well known peoples' biographies; most were deleted because they failed the WP:NFCC#8 criteria.
More recently individual stamp deletion nominations, such as Houdini and Marie Marvingt in addition to recent general discussions Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 40#Postage stamps and Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 40#Stamps where the consensus goes against keeping non-free images in biographic articles without critical discussion.
In this Steinbeck instance, one editor has suggested that because the USPS has never prosecuted anyone that we should not be deleting these types of images. This goes completely against Wikipedia respect for copyright and must be ignored as a complete red herring and the view of the post office in fair use of not, by another editor, is not our concern. We try to respect fair use, hence WP:NFCC and WP:NFC.
Remember the burden of proof to provide a suitable rationale is on the editors who want to retain the image in an article and not on the editor nominating any image for deletion. If there were some reasonable critical commentary AND an appropriate rationale this image might not be a candidate for deletion per the enforcement of WP:NFCC. If you still don't agree this use is inappropriate the next step is to go for a formal WP:IfD nomination. ww2censor ( talk) 16:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for looking at the Postage stamps and postal history of the French Southern & Antarctic Territories article I wrote; I made some revisions in Sources, as you suggested. If you wouldn't mind, I've been working on expanding the War tax stamp article and would much appreciate it if you were willing to have a look at that one. -- Amvros ( talk) 04:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Could you explain this edit please. BigDunc Talk 21:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
Awarded for very good work dealing with stamp images that aren't appropriate for use here. Stifle ( talk) 13:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC) |
I'm a bit surprised that you have removed the contact details, especially as this information was on that page for over a year. You participated in the discussion about that exact chapter in February 2008 (see here) and at that point you did not object. You actually noticed that the link to the PNA Philatelic Office was not working, rather than making any objection for its inclusion...
I'm perfectly willing to compromise, leaving out the exact communication details, but I'd like to have an explanation from you why you have changed your mind about this, now suddenly describing that information as essentially spam and promoting a commercial enterprise as well and being unencyclopaedic .... Bleddynefans ( talk) 18:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The Census Bureau web site does not directly provide links for its maps, and I want to thank you for your tweaks in sourcing File:Census Bureau map of Washington, New Jersey.gif. In addition to the several other maps under discussion, I have uploaded several hundred other maps from the census bureau, none of which have a URL that might be used to see that the original came straight from a United States Government source, and I can't imagine spending the time and effort to correct each of them to stave off deletion. What should I be doing to deal with these FfD's? Thanks again for your efforts. Alansohn ( talk) 03:50, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for rating it B. Should I send it for a GA assessment if it's that good? -- can dle • wicke 03:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Faux Rock, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faux Rock. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Atama chat 17:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ww2censor. Given all of the recent unfortunate crime activity in the Dublin area, I decided that this was worthy of mention in the Dublin article.
I made a statement that was sourced from a reliable, verifiable and neutral source. Also, the story is notable. For example, the Irish govt has had to introduce new legislation to combat the issue.
Can you shed some light on why people may not like me mentioning this information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by IrishPatriots ( talk • contribs) 13:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ww2censor, I have given Windmill Lane Studios the "immediate attention" it was requiring. Do you think it is of "low importance" though as the people and history I have found to be associated with it makes me wonder if this correct? Also, could you please tell me if this is free to use - it says "some rights reserved" and I want to do it absolutely correctly. Thanks again. -- can dle • wicke 02:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
For your continued advice and assistance, your article ratings and for cheering me up quite a lot at this moment in time. It's about time I gave you a barnstar. can dle • wicke 03:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC) |
Hello. Instead of adding more and more deletion requests for same image category and for the same uploader, please put them all under one title (i.e 'XXX images') and make a list of these non-free images. I can help if you wish.-- O sama KReply? on my talk page, please 04:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I've left a somewhat belated thank you. Have a good one! — Satori Son 15:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
If you are coming here to complain to me about my removal of a flagicon from a biographical article you have an interest in. Let me explain that flagicons fail MOS:FLAG if used to indicate nationality or country of birth in infoboxes in order to avoid flag problems. Use of flagicons to indicate place of birth or death are expressly forbidden per WP:FLAGBIO. It is best to avoid any problems from the start and the reasons are described in that section of the Manual of Style. Please go read it even if you disagree with the removal. Unfortunately many editors are not aware of this. Cheers ww2censor ( talk) 05:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Please desist. You are in the wrong here and unless you plan on rectifying your trail of destruction you seem to be creating a lot of work for other editors. Pyrop e 13:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Might I point out that the "Nationality" box links to FIA Super Licence to make it clear that it refers to sporting nationality? -- Ian Dalziel ( talk) 17:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ww2censor:
I just wanted to let you know that we've started a new Ireland Wikimedian email list, that you can join, at mail:WikimediaIE. For Wikimedians in Ireland and Wikimedians interested in events in Ireland and efforts in Ireland. It's there to to discuss meetups, partnerships with Museums and National Archives and any other similar events. -- Bastique demandez 22:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 02:49, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Is this correct? "A Cinderella stamps is" .. "stamps" and "A" and "is" don't appear to agree. If that's what the cite says, it's fine, but it made me wonder if it was a typo. tedder ( talk) 03:50, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The images you listed can be deleted. One is an outdated pic and the other shows my nametag. I have no objections to those two pics being deleted. Hueydoc ( talk) 23:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
You might be interested in a comment I've left in an FfD.-- Rockfang ( talk) 21:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Please be careful when tagging images like this. Both of these images were uploaded to Wikipedia in June 2007 and to the other site in November 2007, meaning that either the same person uploaded them both places or the other site stole them from here. (Or, I suppose, it is possible that both users copied the photo from some unknown third party.) It's actually a pretty common thing for people to upload photos to Google Earth from Wikipedia without respecting our licenses - twice, I have filed copyright complaints with them when my own photos which I uploaded here under the GFDL were taken and used without attribution. -- B ( talk) 22:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for you help on the Thomas MacNevin article. -- Domer48 'fenian' 07:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
First of all, congrats on your excellent user page, I really enjoyed looking at those stamps. I have as requested found a reference to my contribution on the Phoenix Park (the OPW website). You may wish to satisfy yourself, as a senior editor, of its bona fides and then delete the request for sources/references that you posted yesterday. If you see me appearing again please leave a note on my "my Talk" page and I will do my best to address it (as I may not always revisit my contributions).
Is mise le meas, Skreen ( talk) 18:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
First of all, apologies for the delay in responding to you. I will try my best to update this entry but must admit I am not a subject matter expert.
![]() | 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. |
Talk page • Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 • Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 • Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 • Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12
Hello ww2censor. The article Knut Glomsaas seems to be a translated and partially rephrased excerpt from the reference provided. All the facts contained in the article is also included in the reference, which is an article ( Google translation) from the Trondheim-based newspaper Adresseavisen. Could this be a copyright violation? Would it also be one if the text or an excerpt of it were retold from memory in one's own words? The subject's notability has also been disputed. He is mentioned in Store norske leksikon in the article about military music as a well-known military musician. He also has an entry in Cappelens musikkleksikon (Cappelen's encyclopedia of music). I would think this indicates he is notable in the Norwegian Wikipedias, but I wonder if he is in the English one. What would you think? Iceblock ( talk) 13:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Randall here, the error was with the computer not me. I finally got the link to work. This is free material, and it very good as a reference. In fact i,am getting ready to put up more References on him. Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Randall O ( talk • contribs) 20 May 2009
The stamp image file:SteinbeckStamp.JPG is now used to illustrate just one thing in the article: the fact that he was honored with a postage stamp. Fair enough? S B H arris 06:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
It appears that you're unfamiliar with U.S. copyright law. By law, anything produced by the U.S. federal government cannot be copyrighted. See United States copyright law. Ergo, the Steinbeck stamp, which was produced by the U.S. government, is not copyrighted. So please end the battle over a non-existent copyright. -- Sift& Winnow 21:21, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Apologies for the delay in replying but I had to search for some links and also been busy the last few days. A fuller rational for deletion follows below:
In most instance where stamps are not being used correctly in biographic article, removal of the stamp from the article and then marking as an orphan has been efficient but I have no problem in discussion this in depth and even bring it to WP:IfD where more expert editors can weigh in. If no reliable third parties have written about the stamp in relation to John Steinbeck himself then it should not be included and we may even be supporting original research by assigning the stamp some importance in the biography.
The improper use of non-free stamp images has been discussed at various places before and deletion sweeps have been made to remove such uses, including those in some rather high profile people's biographies. These administrator noticeboard discussions prove this is an ongoing problem that needs addressing regularly: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive54#Stamps wrongly claimed as Fair use: serious copyright problem, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive59#Fair use stamps: revisitied ..., Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive62#Orphaned non-free stamp images and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive165#Invalid fair use of stamps: Admin.2Fbot action required. This January 2008 IfD page clearly demonstrated that even though some editors disagreed with the deletion nominations, many being used in raher well known peoples' biographies; most were deleted because they failed the WP:NFCC#8 criteria.
More recently individual stamp deletion nominations, such as Houdini and Marie Marvingt in addition to recent general discussions Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 40#Postage stamps and Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 40#Stamps where the consensus goes against keeping non-free images in biographic articles without critical discussion.
In this Steinbeck instance, one editor has suggested that because the USPS has never prosecuted anyone that we should not be deleting these types of images. This goes completely against Wikipedia respect for copyright and must be ignored as a complete red herring and the view of the post office in fair use of not, by another editor, is not our concern. We try to respect fair use, hence WP:NFCC and WP:NFC.
Remember the burden of proof to provide a suitable rationale is on the editors who want to retain the image in an article and not on the editor nominating any image for deletion. If there were some reasonable critical commentary AND an appropriate rationale this image might not be a candidate for deletion per the enforcement of WP:NFCC. If you still don't agree this use is inappropriate the next step is to go for a formal WP:IfD nomination. ww2censor ( talk) 16:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for looking at the Postage stamps and postal history of the French Southern & Antarctic Territories article I wrote; I made some revisions in Sources, as you suggested. If you wouldn't mind, I've been working on expanding the War tax stamp article and would much appreciate it if you were willing to have a look at that one. -- Amvros ( talk) 04:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Could you explain this edit please. BigDunc Talk 21:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
Awarded for very good work dealing with stamp images that aren't appropriate for use here. Stifle ( talk) 13:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC) |
I'm a bit surprised that you have removed the contact details, especially as this information was on that page for over a year. You participated in the discussion about that exact chapter in February 2008 (see here) and at that point you did not object. You actually noticed that the link to the PNA Philatelic Office was not working, rather than making any objection for its inclusion...
I'm perfectly willing to compromise, leaving out the exact communication details, but I'd like to have an explanation from you why you have changed your mind about this, now suddenly describing that information as essentially spam and promoting a commercial enterprise as well and being unencyclopaedic .... Bleddynefans ( talk) 18:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The Census Bureau web site does not directly provide links for its maps, and I want to thank you for your tweaks in sourcing File:Census Bureau map of Washington, New Jersey.gif. In addition to the several other maps under discussion, I have uploaded several hundred other maps from the census bureau, none of which have a URL that might be used to see that the original came straight from a United States Government source, and I can't imagine spending the time and effort to correct each of them to stave off deletion. What should I be doing to deal with these FfD's? Thanks again for your efforts. Alansohn ( talk) 03:50, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for rating it B. Should I send it for a GA assessment if it's that good? -- can dle • wicke 03:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Faux Rock, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faux Rock. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Atama chat 17:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ww2censor. Given all of the recent unfortunate crime activity in the Dublin area, I decided that this was worthy of mention in the Dublin article.
I made a statement that was sourced from a reliable, verifiable and neutral source. Also, the story is notable. For example, the Irish govt has had to introduce new legislation to combat the issue.
Can you shed some light on why people may not like me mentioning this information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by IrishPatriots ( talk • contribs) 13:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ww2censor, I have given Windmill Lane Studios the "immediate attention" it was requiring. Do you think it is of "low importance" though as the people and history I have found to be associated with it makes me wonder if this correct? Also, could you please tell me if this is free to use - it says "some rights reserved" and I want to do it absolutely correctly. Thanks again. -- can dle • wicke 02:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
For your continued advice and assistance, your article ratings and for cheering me up quite a lot at this moment in time. It's about time I gave you a barnstar. can dle • wicke 03:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC) |
Hello. Instead of adding more and more deletion requests for same image category and for the same uploader, please put them all under one title (i.e 'XXX images') and make a list of these non-free images. I can help if you wish.-- O sama KReply? on my talk page, please 04:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I've left a somewhat belated thank you. Have a good one! — Satori Son 15:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
If you are coming here to complain to me about my removal of a flagicon from a biographical article you have an interest in. Let me explain that flagicons fail MOS:FLAG if used to indicate nationality or country of birth in infoboxes in order to avoid flag problems. Use of flagicons to indicate place of birth or death are expressly forbidden per WP:FLAGBIO. It is best to avoid any problems from the start and the reasons are described in that section of the Manual of Style. Please go read it even if you disagree with the removal. Unfortunately many editors are not aware of this. Cheers ww2censor ( talk) 05:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Please desist. You are in the wrong here and unless you plan on rectifying your trail of destruction you seem to be creating a lot of work for other editors. Pyrop e 13:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Might I point out that the "Nationality" box links to FIA Super Licence to make it clear that it refers to sporting nationality? -- Ian Dalziel ( talk) 17:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ww2censor:
I just wanted to let you know that we've started a new Ireland Wikimedian email list, that you can join, at mail:WikimediaIE. For Wikimedians in Ireland and Wikimedians interested in events in Ireland and efforts in Ireland. It's there to to discuss meetups, partnerships with Museums and National Archives and any other similar events. -- Bastique demandez 22:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 02:49, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Is this correct? "A Cinderella stamps is" .. "stamps" and "A" and "is" don't appear to agree. If that's what the cite says, it's fine, but it made me wonder if it was a typo. tedder ( talk) 03:50, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The images you listed can be deleted. One is an outdated pic and the other shows my nametag. I have no objections to those two pics being deleted. Hueydoc ( talk) 23:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
You might be interested in a comment I've left in an FfD.-- Rockfang ( talk) 21:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Please be careful when tagging images like this. Both of these images were uploaded to Wikipedia in June 2007 and to the other site in November 2007, meaning that either the same person uploaded them both places or the other site stole them from here. (Or, I suppose, it is possible that both users copied the photo from some unknown third party.) It's actually a pretty common thing for people to upload photos to Google Earth from Wikipedia without respecting our licenses - twice, I have filed copyright complaints with them when my own photos which I uploaded here under the GFDL were taken and used without attribution. -- B ( talk) 22:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for you help on the Thomas MacNevin article. -- Domer48 'fenian' 07:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
First of all, congrats on your excellent user page, I really enjoyed looking at those stamps. I have as requested found a reference to my contribution on the Phoenix Park (the OPW website). You may wish to satisfy yourself, as a senior editor, of its bona fides and then delete the request for sources/references that you posted yesterday. If you see me appearing again please leave a note on my "my Talk" page and I will do my best to address it (as I may not always revisit my contributions).
Is mise le meas, Skreen ( talk) 18:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
First of all, apologies for the delay in responding to you. I will try my best to update this entry but must admit I am not a subject matter expert.