User talk:Peripitus/Archive7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anthony Chidiac

Dear Peripitus. I am disappointed that you have deleted article Anthony Chidiac without:

1) Properly looking at the contents of the debate (subject requested debate continue until he returns in mid february)

2) Your allegations are completely untrue

3) You have gone against a consensus of people (some editors and admins) who said to cleanup not delete, again check sources properly please

4) You have sent me a pile of rubbish on my userpage (about copyrighted photos) when e-mails/faxes went direct to wikimedia clearing such images.

5) The Age, Herald Sun, CNN, Today Show, Dave & Kim, Government Publications, Channel Nine, etc etc are all INDEPENDENT and MAJOR Sources in both Australia and the world. The previous two attempts lacked this reference material. I remind you that Wikipedia is a reference of references.

Please reconsider your decision. You have deleted an important person in the digital technology industry without following due process, reading, and ignoring the requests of a consensus of individuals.

Being mindful of your other behaviour here in wikipedia, I will as a last resort ask for a deletion review if you dont seem to understand why I feel that your decision is completely unjustified.

Thanking you in consideration of such.--Cafejunkie (talk) 08:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hi, i uploaded three images in wikimedia commons which are the exact duplicate of images i previously uploaded in wikipedia. As such, i would appreciate it if you would take the time to delete the wikipedia images. Thanks. The images are as follows:

Thank you very much. If you don't mind, i have one last request! A week ago, i uploaded two images of the Indian-American novelist, Richard Crasta on Wikimedia commons. On my request, he sent evidence of his permission, but an OTRS ticket has not been issued so far. Therefore, i would appreciate it if you would do as required. The images are as follows:
This one too. I uploaded a copy of it in commons a month ago. I forgot to mention this last time. Sorry!

Horowitz in Moscow.png

Can the tag on the file's page be removed, as it has not been deleted. Etincelles ♬♬(talk) 16:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:KPCKim.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:KPCKim.jpg. Because you were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. The DRV is located here: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 December 9 Dreadstar ☥ 03:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Kent Hrbek Image

You are absolutely correct, I misread the policy. The image has been removed from the article. Thank you for your help. Rapier1 (talk) 06:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Images

Hi Peripitus, The images added have been used by various websites and they are commonly spread over the internet and people are using it. If you search google you will find how frequent these images are being used and i have added the common ones and not the rare which leads to copyright violation as if that would be the case then no one would have used it except the copyrighted holder.... Kindly check my point of view before doing so, as i feel by adding it we are giving a realistic touch ( a face to the article of a living person who might be not so known by all of us.).I feel adding image is just giving more value additions to the articles--Suraj845 (talk) 08:24, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 November 29#File:Metalslugairbrush.JPG

I was just wondering of you could provide a deletion rationale as there seemed to be substantial grey area on this one. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


Thanks

Thanks i will keep in mind and will add only free content in here...--Suraj845 (talk) 06:00, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


Regarding Image

A week ago, i uploaded an image on a Konkani cultural event, Konkani_Nirantari, on Wikimedia commons. On my request, Daijiworld Media Pvt Mangalore has sent evidence of his permission, but an OTRS ticket has not been issued so far. Therefore, i would appreciate it if you would do as required.--Sanfy (talk) 13:17, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Eagle Scout medal 1911.png

Your retag of File:Eagle Scout medal 1911.png is interesting in light of questions I posed yesterday at Wikipedia talk:Public domain#Congressional charter. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 13:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Removal of ANATROLLER ARI-100 from Robot page

Please inform me of any changes made to my post before making them. I have the sole ownership over this picture along with Robotics Design Inc., and ave listed it under the creative commons 3.0. Please do not delete this file again. Any comments you may have may be directed to me at helloman911777@hotmail.com or on my discussion page, with the knoledge that once the dispute is resolved, all text from my discussion page will be removed. Canadiansteve (talk) 18:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Peripitus I am the copywrite holder. You may contact our company president Mr. Charles Khairallah, at +1(514) 223-2540 and confirm this if you like. The image is under any licence i release it under. As long as it says Robotics Design, or has a logo, I have full authorization from the inventor of the technology and obviously the company to use these images in any way i see fit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canadiansteve (talk • contribs) 17:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have marked an associated image for deletion for the second time, see Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2009_December_20#File:ANATROLLER_ARI-100_Duct_cleaning_and_Inspection_robot.jpg. I note you previously correctly informed this editor about the correct process for releasing such an image.—Ash (talk) 10:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Danny F II images

I've now sorted the licences for the images used in the article. Mjroots (talk) 12:52, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I've been through the other images too. Will add a note to myself on my talk page so I don't forget in future. I think one file I uploaded (File:K&ESR closure poster.JPG) may be Crown Copyright, and therefore copyright expired as it is over 50 years since original creation. Mjroots (talk) 13:03, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I've amended the Non-free use rationale template to show that it must be used in conjunction with the other template. Mjroots (talk) 13:22, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Kings and Queens

Why did you nominate those images for speedy deletion? I have special permission to use those images, as well as several other images from Discogs.com that are currently in use. Please remove those deletion tags. They are not in any copyright violation, for the administrators from that website gave me permission to post them on Wikipedia. --J miester25 (talk) 11:46, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Abike Dabiri

I am sincerely requesting that you leave the article "Abike Dabiri" untouched till i get through with it. Please stop the power-play as i currently cannot source the requested 'References' but will do that soon.Olusegun (talk) 17:07, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Willis

And hey, how did you find the link? Sneeky bugger! Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 08:19, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Good work :) Merry Christmas and New Year! Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 08:23, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Concerning the photograph of Ms Niku Kheradmand

Dear Peripitus, thank you for your very pragmatic approach to the issue. Thank you also for your message. With kind regards, --BF 13:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC).

Concerning Misc27x.jpg

Dear Peripitus, I seem to be losing this argument. The photo of Allan Sandage has been removed, and I still don't quite agree with your arguments. To remind you, this was a photo of Allan that was on a Christmas card, from around 1965 that was sent to me. When I was in charge of a science library, I was informed that if the images were taken before a certain date, around 1965 or so and not otherwise copyrighted and a new copyright filed, the image would be in the public domain. Because of this, I was able to provide photographs of scientists and science experiments that were cataloged in our library if they were old enough. Thus I am still not sure why the photo was deleted. Because of the deletion, there is now no photo of Allan Sandage as a young man (when he made his great discoveries). However, I am so tired of this fight that I give up and will not post any more photos for Sandage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Puzhok (talk • contribs) 04:07, 22 December 2009 (UTC) Puzhok 02:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:Hiram Bithorn.JPG

I has asked for a deletion review of File:Hiram Bithorn.JPG. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Damiens.rf 10:18, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


File Deletion Cause

Hi Peripitus. I wanted to know why on earth you deleted the photo of Delhi Public School, Sushant Lok on the page Gurgaon. Do you live in Gurgaon or what? Please give me a good reason for this as I am really upset. It is one of the best schools in Gurgaon. For your information, the image was NOT copyrighted as I had taken it myself !! Thank You.Mr.A 17:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Jon Johanson

G'day; just a quick note to say nice work on (re-)creating the article. YSSYguy (talk) 11:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

My Pic

thanksД narchistPig (talk) 20:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

re: The-Police Outlandos-d'Amour-yellow.jpg and The Police Outlandos d'Amour original front cvr.jpg

hi- while i think yr point, that "The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding", is valid for the yellow variation on the cover, this doesn't hold true for Outlandos d'Amour original front cvr.jpg. the graphic design of this cover is different enough to convey a notably less modern, pop-punky feel. this cover is also holds historical interest for being relatively rare. Fp cassini (talk) 00:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC) 

 File:The-Police Outlandos-d'Amour-yellow.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Fp cassini (notify | contribs).

   * Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

   Note that this also applies to File:The Police Outlandos d'Amour original front cvr.jpg in the same article - Peripitus (Talk) 22:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Zelluloid

I read what you wrote for the reason why its warranted for deletion but it doesn't make any sense. If im not allowed to post that cover then how else am I supposed to show the viewer the limited edition cover. Look at Kraftwerk's page, it shows limited/alternate edition album covers and there not being deleted or is it another reason what you wrote I can't understand what you said,lol. Please elaborate. Thanks :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KenshinXSlayer (talk • contribs) 06:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I listed the Limited Edition album cover because that cover features additional songs not on the original album cover and people would know what it looks like although it is very rare to find. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KenshinXSlayer (talk • contribs) 21:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Whenicomearoundausingle.jpg

Thoughts on your closure here?

It's not one of the sort you would normally nominate yourself. Jheald (talk) 12:14, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. To clarify, as far as I am aware, since February last year you have nominated few if any alternate covers unless they looked very substantially similar to ones already in use -- basically in line with the proposal suggested at WT:ALBUMS, which received buy-in at WT:NFC, that Essentially, an alternate cover that is significantly different from the original and is widely distributed and/or replaces the original passes the criteria for identification. The album cover that has just been deleted was not very substantially similar to the other one shown, it was indeed significantly different, and widely distributed.
As for whether "the debate's conclusion was clear", you're well aware that these discussions are not votes. The submissions from Angus McLellan, Bility, and Rettetest showed no understanding of the policy framework of why we generally show album covers at all -- what the purpose is, and why it is considered to pass NFCC#8 -- and so, per the guidance to Xfd closers, should have been ignored. Jheald (talk) 08:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

it seems clear...

About this closing, what exactly makes you think "it seems clear that this was created b a US soldier/employee"? Couldn't it have been done by some war-photo-journalist, for instance? --Damiens.rf 19:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Your opinion would be appreciated

Noting that you did the GA review, I was hoping you would comment on the issue being rased about the phrase "cliff notes" here. Your opinion is respected either way; I just want to see if this review is an anomaly (which I think it is). If you share the reviewer's sentiments, then changes can be made. Thanks! upstateNYer 23:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

reply from JoshCrutchley

No it doesnt make it clear that they be deleted. It says on the website if you read it, that wikiapedia user name JoshCrutchley as fullrights to use this image on wikiapedia. Please read! I am username JoshCrutchley. He states that this is ok!

I dont know what else to do or how to keep them on here. I have full rights as it states and im showing you that under the image agreement with a link. If im doing this wrong and the owner permission still isnt enough can you put this images under the right section with a tag. Im giving up on this artical that keeps being changed every so many days —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshcrutchley (talk • contribs) 10:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

agazaryan image

hi,

I have been in contact with the manager of Aga Zaryan and requested that he send the permissions email toy wikipedia. This was done (I think) about 3-4 weeks ago. Now I'm not sure what the linkage is like (between permissions and the checkers and all the other dept. it may or may not have to go through) so I just carried on after knowing the permissions have been sent. If I have done something wrong it would be good to know because really this whole process has taken far too long already to be resolved. I'm not angry just a little bored by the ins and outs which invariably mean there is another minor problem which leads to another deletion or mail. Please please help me to sort this out once and for all.

Marta Orlik is not important because I got this image from the management of A.Zaryan who own the copyright. Orlik is the photographer and not the owner. I think this is clear now.

the permissions email (for AZaryan Singing.jpg) was sent by Tomasz Czulak (the manager of A.Zaryan) to permissions in december.

on the image it is stated which permissions I asked Tomasz to request (i know because I completed the template for him, before asking him to send it from his account)

I don't know what else to do...

please help. fizik —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiziklsean (talk • contribs) 18:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


dear peripitus,

as far as I have been led to believe the copyrights of the image are under the control of the Zaryan management so I do not know where to go with this. I will see what I can do, please do not delete anything because I'm working on a solution, unless you have a better idea... ?

(Fiziklsean (talk) 13:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC))

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 January 13#File:1871sujagi.jpg

Hi. Please, some thoughts on this closing? There's no verifiable source information and no way to determine if the image is really what it's said to be, let alone it's date o first publishing or license. This problems have not been addressed in the discussion. Why is it that you believe that this image should be allowed to be kept that way? --Damiens.rf 13:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Um, author died c. 1909. Picture made in 1871, and can reasonably assumed for this photographic author to be published during their lifetime given the vast number of published images by them from the same time, if not proximate to the creation date. We seem to have enough information to verify that this is PD. I can't see any way that it is not PD. Note that the local copy has gone as the image is on commons - see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1871sujagi.jpg - Peripitus (Talk) 02:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Without a source, we can't make sure the author is really who it's said to be. --Damiens.rf 04:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

11 Deluxe (Image File)

You had posted something about the image not being properly described for use on Wikipedia, or something. I just logged into Wikipedia for the first time in a while today (didn't realize I wasn't logged in for last three weeks or so and haven't been editing) and see that the image is already deleted. Assuming you have admin. abilities, can you please restore it so I can go ahead and make the changes needed? I thought I had provided the information, so I'd like to take another look at it and find out what I did wrong.

If this cannot be done, I will be reuploading the image because the image does qualify under free media as a JPG is a very low-quality version of the cover that would not be sufficient for reproduction, among other reasons in the criteria required. I will ensure it is listed properly this time around.

Turns out I have other image claims to dispute as well that have already been deleted. The things I miss by not logging in. =/ CycloneGU (talk) 04:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Harmonic series with Helmholtz-Ellis JI pitch notation.gif

You said it was a scan from a book. I guess I missed that. When I read the description I thought the claim was it was generated by the user, not copied. Could you tell me how you knew it was a scan from a book? Hobit (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

  • That would do it. Don't know why, but I thought it was an original computer generated work. Thanks! Hobit (talk) 13:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thierry Desmarest

Hello. Would you consider undeleting Thierry Desmarest so I can add these sources: [1] [2] [3] [4]? --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I was just looking into this one too--highly notable french executive, definitely easily sourceable.--Milowent (talk) 01:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Could you get the talk page too? --Apoc2400 (talk) 11:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Could I get these too:

  1. John Nesheim [5] [6] [7](self)
  2. Tony DeMarco [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]
  3. Bill Dancy [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]
  4. Greg McLaren maybe notable [23] [24] [25]
  5. Elizabeth Marincola maybe notable [26] [27]

--Apoc2400 (talk) 13:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello again. Could you undelete Bill Harris (lobbyist) or userify it for me? I have sources. --Apoc2400 (talk) 20:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Userfy Request.

I can't state what the old page had but I'd like to ask you to userfy this article Markar Melkonian to me and I will salvage what I can. I believe this author to be notableHell In A Bucket (talk) 03:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually the author and the professor seem to be one in the same. I have republished iwith a few sources. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


File: Sam-Giancana.jpg

Peripitus, please undelete this file. The prior image showed Sam Giancana handcuffed to a chair and is not the same image. Now, I don't claim to have a complete understanding of the image policy yet, however, I am aware that if there is no free equivalent of an image, a copyrighted imaged can be used in a limited way (example, to provide a photo of an individual on their wiki page (not a userpage ) ). Sam Giancana is dead, and there is no free equivalent, therefore, as far as I know, this image is suitable for use at least on his wiki entry. I won't re-upload the image, but please be aware it was not the same image of him and again, he's dead , so no free equivalent exists of him. Thanks

Naluboutes,NalubotesAeria Gloris,Aeria Gloris 13:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


Peripitus, the original image was on commons and it showed Sam Giancana handcuffed to a chair, that got deleted.

Not sure if someone uploaded another image (like the one I uploaded) Either way, there is no free equivalent of his image and as far as I know, even though Wikipedia strives for free (not copyrighted) photos, if there is no free equivalent, it's acceptable to Wikipedia to have it for use in an article, for that very reason. I'm requesting undeletion on that basis, no free equivalent. Check WP:NFC, the policy section. It appears to meet all 10 rationale that would allow the image to remain.

Naluboutes,NalubotesAeria Gloris,Aeria Gloris 17:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Bigjohnwood

Due respect, but this user has already created a nonsense page Big John Woods, and this other page is completely nonsense. It merely copies over elements from Tosh.0. I respectfully ask you reconsider speedy deletion. MKoltnow 06:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Slovak propaganda poster.jpg

THX for the notification. Is it Ok now? Cheers,--B@xter9 11:43, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Cheers--B@xter9 11:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

File restored

I've restored File:Zonkers3.JPG, as you gave no reason for deleting it and the current state of the discussion certainly doesn't support it. Nobody was ever even able to point to a Wikipedia policy as a reason. Besides which, they weren't there for deletion; worst case scenario, it's Fair Use. It's listed at possibly unfree files, not files for deletion.

I know a lot of admins use WP:PUF as a backdoor to delete files uploaded by vandals and new users, but that's not the case here. If it's just that it got caught up with a bunch of others while you were cleaning house, I understand. Otherwise, it's poor form to sweep in after almost 3 weeks of discussion and delete it without comment. Kafziel Complaint Department 07:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Deleted Images - from Pilgrimhawk

Hi Peripitus,

thanks a lot for the note.

just wanted to make few things clear. i began contributing to wikipedia as another volunteer who wanted to do his part.

Regarding images : The images i uploaded earlier( with source mentioned etc...) got deleted...despite my giving all the needed information , the images got deleted. the final resort ( i agree it was immature and unprofessional) to mention it as "own image" ... not with an idea of stealing it , but with the thought that images must be in place. i did if after mentioning it to the individuals profiled on these respective wiki pages . Any way, i assure you that it will not be done the same way again. Will try my best to source the images , but can you guarantee that those images will not be deleted.

i strongly believe that i can contribute my tiny bit to Wikipedia... i find awful lot of topics not touched by wikipedia..and i wish to do what ever i can to enrich wikipedia - this is my sole guiding principle. i request you not to doubt my integrity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilgrimhawk (talk • contribs) 04:57, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright

The image was published over 50 years ago in Lebanon, a personal potrait of the family the PRESIDENT of Lebanon,any image of him would belong to the Lebanese goverment and thier law states an Image over 50 years is copyright free.I've stated who took the picture and where it was taken (exact date) i didnt have these details before and this is something alot of other do not include in the Lebanon public domain Miss-simworld ‎ (talk) 10:16, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Image deletion policy

FYI, I am still waiting for your response to this. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Peripatus

Just noticed your nom at FFD and wondered: is the quote on your user page is actually a reference to Peripatus? Mike Christie (talk) 02:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Helen Razer

Just wanted to say thanks for your help!

P.S. I did look at a number of the histories; however, it appears I did not go back far enough. I actually caught on to the article when I saw it tagged for "blanking" on the "Recent Changes" page. My first step was to revert the article to its most recent form and then to add the general improvement template (as I was pretty overwhelmed with the scale of whatever was going on.) Unfortunately, 10 of so edits after I posted the improvement template one of the unregistered IP's responsible for several of the disruptive changes removed it.

Bmhs823 (talk) 13:43, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Well done. I was just thinking of doing the same thing. I'm also going to delete her birth date. It is controversial, apparently, and unsourced. Hope that's okay with you. If not, feel free to revert; it's not a big deal that I'd be dying in a ditch over. Metamagician3000 (talk) 14:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Little brown bat

Thanks for deleting the rest of the vandalism. I usually go back a couple of edits to make sure I've found it all. Neglected to do that this time. Just what is it about this bat that attracts so many trolls? -- Cuppysfriend (talk) 23:09, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

AFD closure

Love it :D. Orderinchaos 11:52, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


Missy Higgins peer review

Hello Peripitus, thanks so much for the comments you made at the Missy Higgins Peer Review. I think I've addressed all your points now and was wondering if you could have another quick look to see if you agree? Thanks, --BelovedFreak 13:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Images

Both articles are nearly 4 years old all the images ppl did upload (which I advised them not to) where all copyrighted or they didnt know had to put the right information in. I have made requests to wikipedians if they have this photos. However I think it may come down to me contacting various sources for permission I can do this but the issue of proving permission to wikipedia is what i need to be understand how it works.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 19:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

its unlikely an image that way is going to be produced the ones that did before turned out the person pretended they owned the copyright even if they did they filled such poor info it got deleted. Its slightly confusing, so who needs to critea for the photo submission,(i therefore...) me or them (the copyright owner)? thanks for the details so far ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 21:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Your comment at BLP II

Hi Peripitus:

You wrote, "Support - I cannot see why this is so controversial. We do this for images many times each day. Images with no source are tagged for "speedy deletion" after 7 days and biographical articles can be the same. I have always regarded that speedy-delete refers to the decision process, not the timeframe." You do realize that is not what speedy deletion is? Speedy deletion is wherein somebody can unilaterally delete the article within minutes of it's creation---some do so without any notification whatsoever. What you are describing above, is the PROD option described earlier in the RfC. BLP-PROD deals allows for a 7 day "clean up" period.---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 17:48, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Unfree image

How is it unfree; he gave me permission and changed the copyright; please go to the Flickr page. The image is here: Colortrak 2000. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh my God I wondered that for a second before asking him permission but thought, no way. I thought here that it was going to be the "wrong some rights reserved" license; but not this. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Okay well do you have any idea what program it is or if it is fair use; it's old for one thing. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Grrrr Daniel Christensen (talk) 06:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
8

Actually yeah I guess it's not the end of the world to delete it it's not a great image; and the back is the one I need more actually. Daniel Christensen (talk) 06:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

and as far as his license on it being different than the one i slapped on it real quick i know that he chose the "wrong" some rights reserved one, only the one with just the guy or the guy and the upside down C are the good ones; he picked the one with the dollar sign. Daniel Christensen (talk) 06:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey hey look here! It says any of the above conditions CAN BE WAIVED if the copyright holder says so: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/deed.en and believe me he says so. Daniel Christensen (talk) 06:15, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Saeid Mozaffari Zadeh

Hi there and thank you for the notice. I have just added some references in English and deleted some sections. I hope this changes your mind. Thank you Sohrab 0611 (talk) 06:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:Robert M. Isaac.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:Robert M. Isaac.jpg. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 21:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Anstey Hill

Are you going to have another crack at FA? YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars photo poll) 07:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination for Mark Sparnon

Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Sparnon, an article you proposed for deletion. Cnilep (talk) 18:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of "Execution in China.jpg"

Hello, the picture "Execution in China.jpg" has recently been deleted. Unfortunately, I didn't have the chance to contribute to the discussion as I wasn't aware that it taking place in so many different places. There was only two replies on the deletion discussion, so I though it woulnd't have been deleted.

Personnally, I think this picture is useful and meet the fair-use criteria because it depicts a mean of execution that still exists in the PRC, and because it's not possible to find equivalent pictures. I agree there are doubt about who exactly is being executed or what she did but then again there are doubts about just about everything that comes from the PRC.

So I would like to ask - do you think it would be fine to use this picture under fair-use and by using a completely neutral (and non-OR) caption? A specialist from the UCL has confirmed that the picture is recent and that the policemen are indeed from the PLA. Moreover, Amnesty recently wrote that some executions are still carried out by rifle. We know that much so the caption could be "Member of the People's Liberation Army carriyng out an execution". Also it's been difficult to track the exact source of the picture, I see no reason to believe it is a fake so hopefully it can still be used for education purposes. What do you think? Laurent (talk) 11:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Erskineclocktower.jpg

Why did you delete this picture? I took it myself!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_December_19#File:Erskineclocktower.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sycondavey (talk • contribs) 18:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_conference >> images removed despite providing the documentation

File:Lens-logo-infobox.jpg File:Lens-conference.jpg File:Lens-logo.jpg


Hi Peripitus,

this is really disappointing my friend.

despite providing valid documents for using the images, the images are removed. in fact the director of the conference himself hasad written giving the permission and that mail was forwarded to permissions-en‐at‐wikimedia.org as suggested. still the images were ruthlessly removed. i fail to understand the rationale here. it is disappointing.

here is the mail with the conference director's contact details as well >>

from Carlo Vezzoli <carlo.vezzoli@polimi.it> to pilgrimhawk@gmail.com, permissions-en@wikimedia.org date Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 4:49 PM subject copyright permissions to use the images for wikipedia mailed-by polimi.it


To whom it may concern,

I am Carlo Vezzoli, professor of Design for Sustainability at the Politecnico di Milano University, Faculty of Design, INDACO dept. I am the head of a EU funded project (under Asia-Link programme) called LeNS, the Learning network on sustainability (www.lens.polimi.it) and with the other project partners I am now organizing a Conference to be held in Bangalore and titled Sustainability in design: NOW! (www.lemsconference.polimi.it).

In this capacity I am glad to officially grant permission to use the web optimized images of our official logos for the Lens conference/ Learning Network on Sustainability wikipedia page. These are the images in context:

lens-conference.jpg

lens-logo.jpg

lens-logo-infobox.jpg

These images could be licensed in the Creative Commons domain.

please let me know what more do i need to submit..i am completely at a loss to understand the requirements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilgrimhawk (talk • contribs) 14:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

  1. Proposal to Close This RfC
  2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


Viralcd.jpg

Would you please restore Viralcd.jpg. It was put up with the permission of the artist.Valueyou (talk) 05:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Commenting out

When you're "commenting out" (awful term, by the way) images, please remove either the blank line above or below the comment so that it doesn't leave whitespaces in articles. Thanks. - Dudesleeper talk 01:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Peripitus/Archive7&oldid=1143223367"