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.

Archives

2023; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2022; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2021; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2020; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2019; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017; Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Stop removing my pictures! ---Popthemop27— Preceding unsigned comment added by Popthemop27 ( talk • contribs) 10:58, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Please see the message I left on your user talk page. Your are uploading content whose copyright is held by others to Commons as your "own work". If you continue to do this, the files will continue to be removed and deleted, and eventually you will find your account blocked by a Commons administrator. Image use and licensing can be tricky and it's easy to make mistakes, so please carefully ready Wikipedia:Copyrights and better familiarize yourself with what you can and cannot do. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 02:06, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Still a newbie to pictures and logos so could you give me a hand understanding why you removed the logo from the Western Mustang Band page? I was (trying to) use it the same way as the Michigan Marching Band page or the Spartan Marching Band page? Any help would be appreciated! reid.schneider 04:57, 2 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by R.schneider101 ( talk • contribs) 13:57, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi R.schneider101. Not every file you find on Wikipedia is licensed the same way, and how a file is licensed pretty much determines how it may be used. File:Western Ontario Mustangs logo.png is licensed as non-free content, while File:Michigan State Spartans script.svg and File:Michigan Wolverines logo.svg are licensed as public domain content. Non-free content use tends to be quite restrictive and each use of it must satisfy not only Wikipedia:Image use policy, but also Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria; public domain content, on the other hand, is fairly easy to use in that it only needs to satisfy the first of the two policies. Comparing the way different images are used in Wikipedia articles can sometimes be more trickier than it seems for the reasons given in WP:OTHERIMAGE, and in this case trying to compare the way a public domain image is used to the way a non-free image is being used is like trying to compare an apple to an orange.

Anyway, the general consensus established over the years reagarding non-free university team/mascot logo use is that such files are fine to be used in stand-alone articles about the athletic department, such as Western Mustangs, or in stand-alone articles about the mascot itself because these would be considered the parent entity per item 17 of WP:NFC#UUI with respect to the school's choice of branding and it's assumesd that any critical commentary reagarding the logo/mascot would likely be found in such articles. At the same time, the general consesus is that the logo shouldn't be used in articles about the university's individual teams/organizations within university because such use tends to be primarily decorative without any specific content related to the logo/mascot. In such cases, a non-free logo which is specific to the team/organization is preferred instead. So, you might be able to use something like what is shown here or something else specific to the band; but, the automatic default is not to use the main mascot logo is such individual branding doesn't exist. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:23, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly, how are you doing? Thanks for reminding me about the pictures and their licensing. I guess I got a little carried away putting too many of them in certain pages. The only reason I did that was because it looked odd compared to other pages, given that some pages do have logos while others do not. I was simply trying to make it all equal.— Preceding unsigned comment added by RedsRock ( talk • contribs) 12:13, 9 August 2018 (UTC)‎

You can use wordmarks or other files found on Commons if you like, but it's going to be really hard to justify the use of non-free logos are going in such articles unless it's a logo specific to a particular season, such as an anniversary logo, etc. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:24, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

can you share that tool again to check user autoconfirmed status and other things , I forgot to bookmark it ! Crispgatoglitz ( talk) 22:49, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what "tool" you're referring to. Maybe someone else shared it with you? The only way I know to check an editor's status is to go to their user contributions page, scroll all the way to the bottom, and then click on "User rights". -- Marchjuly ( talk) 00:08, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

I am constantly receiving messages of multiple failed or successful password thefts for my wikipedia account , so I changed my password but messages didn't end , please keep a close watch on my edits , otherwise you would blame me for anything that goes wrong !

Crispgatoglitz ( talk) 12:22, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

If you feel that you're account has been hacked or otherwise compromised, then you probably should ask for assistance at WP:AN per Wikipedia:Compromised accounts#After being compromised. Asking others to watch you account for problem edits will not resolve the issue and might actually seem as if you're arguing WP:BROTHER. The best thing to do is explain things to an adminstrator; they will probably block your current account, and you'll then be able to create a new account to use instead. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 00:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks -- Stapmoshun ( talk) 02:33, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Hiya, I left a reply to you on my talk page. I don't know if that gives you a notification, I'm still new to actually editing instead of reading Wikipedia. I like the welcome message we get when leaving a message on your talk page. Can all users do something like that? Thanks. Stapmoshun ( talk) 01:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

@ Stapmoshun: My preferences are set so that if you WP:PING me I will get a notification. Some editors don't like pings ,so they set their set their preferences not to receive any notifications. I also have set my preferences to add pages I edit to my watchilist, so I will see the most recent changes made to them; however, once again other editors might not do this.

So, if someone posts on your user talk page, you can ping them if you want or you can just wait to see if they respond. You can also try using {{ Talkback}} as well. If you ping though, you should be careful not to overdo it because that's likely going to piss people off. People aren't really obligated to respond if they don't want to or they might just be WP:BUSY doing something else; so, if you don't get an immediate response, don't stand at the hotel's front desk tapping the bell repeatedly until someone appears. All that's going to do is give them tons of notifications bascially saying "please answer asap" which is probably not going to place them in a good mood when they do decide to respond.

As for the header on my user talk page, I got it from User talk:Bellerophon/Editnotice and just modified it for my own use. You can use it if you want, or you might find another that you want to use. As long as you WP:PATT where you get anything you copy from another editors talk page you should be OK. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 02:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the information. My apologies if I had tapped that bell at the front desk too many times. I'll be relying on the info you've provided me hopefully for my future here on the site very much, you're very helpful. Stapmoshun ( talk) 02:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't really mind the pings, unless they start to get ridiculous; however, I've come across editors who really do. Anyway, just keep that in the back of your mind when you interact with others. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 02:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Dear Marchjuly, You may remember me for my efforts with the page Bernis von zur Muehlen. It was reassigned to draft space on July 5. I haven't heard anything since then. I am turning to you only because you are knowledgeable, although you may not be specifically involved in this matter. What is the protocol? Am I supposed to assume it's dead? I had read that the lag time can be up to five weeks. Do I get some notification as to the status? My best, Peter Pmuehlen ( talk) 20:08, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

It looks as if the draft is still awaiting a review. There are only so many AfC reviewers, so it sometimes can take awhile for a draft to be reviewed. I moved the "Review wating" template to the top of the page just to make it easier to see for those looking at the draft. That most likely won't speed things up, but it might prevent someone from mistaking the draft for being abandoned per WP:G13. As long as you keep working on the draft and as long as there a no serious problems with it like copyright violations, etc., the draft shouldn't be deleted.

There's really no time limit when it comes to working on drafts or getting them reviewed. The "Review waiting" template says that it might take "7 weeks of more" and that there are "2694 pending submissions waiting for review"; so, you're probably just going to have to wait to someone gets to it. If you want some more specific details as to when An AfC reviewer might get to the draft, you can click on the "ask a question" link in the template. AfC reviewers don't usually move drafts to the head of the queue just because the creator wants a review done asap, but an AfC reviewer might be able to provide some specific suggestions on ways you can further improve the draft while it's waiting to be reviewed.

Just for reference, the AfC review process is not manadatory. Articles can be directly added to the mainspace by their creators. AfC reviewed articles, however, seem to have a better chance of surviving in the mainspace because AfC reviewers usually don't approve drafts which are likely going to end up tagged/nominated for deletion. Submitting something via AfC is not a 100% guarantee against ever being deleted, but it just seems to improve the odds a bit. Moreover, since you also have a COI with respect to your wife, it's probably better in the long-run just to simply wait for the article to be reviewed and keep trying to improve it per the reviewer's suggestions if it's declined. The article has already been draftified once, so trying to move it to the mainspace yourself would probably not be a good idea. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 00:41, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Your prod was deleted. I copied your concern verbatim in a {{ Dfu}} speedy. Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 10:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. I was going to bring it to FFD, but tagging it with dfu works just as well. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 11:00, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Virginia Tech College of Agriculture and Life Sciences logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Football Superleague of Kosovo logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly,

I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join the new page reviewing team, and after reviewing your editing history, I think you would be a good candidate. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; the new page reviewing team needs help from experienced users like yourself.

Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR. If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message on my talk page or at the reviewer's discussion board.

Cheers, and hope to see you around, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{( or here)} 07:10, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your review of the images Still Life with Cat, Little Horse, and Jasmine's Chair. These were included with permission of family, on behalf of the artist. Would it be acceptable to retain one (Still Life with Cat) rather than three? I have identified this in the article as a key example of the artist's printmaking work. MaryHutchison ( talk) 11:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

A non-free image of an artist's work is often considered OK as a representative example of the particular style and technique the artist is known for, but it's best to try to use it in support of sourced critical commentary about work itself or the technique itself (i.e., sources which specifically cite the work in question by name as being particularly representative of the artist's style). Three examples of the artist's work, especially when there's no sourced article content really related to any of one them in particular, is probably going to be seen an unnecessary; one, however, might be acceptable as long as there is a fairly strong contextual connection between article content and image: something which goes beyond simply mentioning the work by name. You should make it as clear as possible in the non-free use rationale how the non-free use of the image satisfies WP:NFCC#8.

Just for reference, Wikipedia doesn't require permission of the original copyright holder for non-free use; however, if you can persuade the original copyright holder to give their explicit consent to release the all or some of the files under a free license, then those files would no longer be subject to non-free content use policy and could more easily be used in the article. For obvious reasons, most artists are reluctant to do this, but you can try asking if you want since you apparently already appear to be in content with the artist or her representatives.

One last thing, you need to be careful of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (particularly WP:FCOI) if your connection to the artist is anything more than a casual one. Even an WP:APPARENTCOI can lead to problems with other editors. I'm only bringing this up because you mentioned the images were included with the family's permission on behalf of the artist. Wikipedia doesn't expressly prohibit COI editing, but it does highly discourage it and such editors are expected to adhere to the guidelines explained in Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 12:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)