User talk:TLSuda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


You requested we complete the Non-free use rationale. We hope the information we are providing is what you are requesting.

Non-free media information and use rationale for AIM at Melanoma Foundation

The logo is AIM at Melanoma Foundation's new logo which will replace the one currently located on Wiki.


We hired an agency to design the logo.


AIM at Melanoma Foundation

Portion used

It is not copyrighted but the logo is being used as a visual identification of AIM at Melanoma Foundation.

Low resolution?

This is a low resolution logo.

Purpose of use

The logo is AIM’s logo which will be used as the primary means of visual identification of the foundation.


AIM no longer wants to be identified with the old logo that currently appears on Wiki’s page. We want the new logo to be the means for people to identify the foundation.

Fair useFair use of copyrighted material in the context of AIM at Melanoma Foundation//

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Guilds (talkcontribs)

Picture request[edit]

You left no comment on my picture. Feeling confused.-- (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The Sheikh Nimr one -- (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, something happened with the scripting. I've just re-commented. Sorry about that. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 16:26, 17 May 2015 (UTC)


Hey! May I ask, you assist with ticket:2015051710012141 as you previously dealt with him/her on ticket:2014071610021202. It's regarding some PDF file which was recently flagged for deletion. Thanks, ///EuroCarGT 20:01, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I've taken the ticked ownership and I've sent a response (although it may be too direct). Hopefully this time it will open some dialogue. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 20:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Deleted photos[edit]

Hi, The photos for 2 articles Skyway Enterprises Flight 7101 and Loganair Flight 670A have been deleted. These photos were of the actual planes that the articles depict. During all my research I never found any free photos. Both of these planes crashed and were destroyed w/loss of life. I contacted both photo owners and got permission to use them. I've read Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. There is no free equivalent for these photos and it is quite impossible for further photos to be taken. Is there a way we can get these photos reinstated? Thanks for your consideration. Samf4u (talk) 21:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey Samf4u. I saw that you had mentioned that those were the actual planes. With most, if not all, plane crash articles, we use a free image of a differently branded but same make/model/design plane. Unless there is something specific that the article discusses about the plane that the actual plane would need to be seen for the text to be understood, there is no reason to use a non-free image (WP:NFCC#8 & WP:NFCC#1). The free equivalent is that there are other still active planes of these models available that could be taken. If you have contacted the photo owners, did you ask them to release it under a free license? If they did, then we could use the images forever without any legal or policy based restrictions. IF you haven't, I would recommend doing that and having them go through the process at commons:Commons:Email_templates. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 21:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi TLSuda, Thanks for your quick response. I understand but it is frustrating. I'll contact them both and ask for free license. Regards, Samf4u (talk) 21:25, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Believe me, I do understand how frustrating it is. And if it seems like our policies are more strict than the law, thats because its true. Our mission has us trying to hit the goal of as much free content as possible. Sometimes that means we have to do something slightly not as good, but close. Another route to go would be if there was discussion in the articles about the crashes that had information that would only make sense if someone saw the crash, we might be able to find crash photos and build a very strong case to beat WP:NFCC#1 & #8. Currently the content isn't there, and it may not be possible, but you never know until you do the research and try. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 21:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
That's a good suggestion! If I can't get the free license release I'll look into it. Samf4u (talk) 22:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files for upload#Request: Equilar[edit]

Sorry! I didn't mean to upload the file after you'd commented asking for a fair use rationale from the requester, ultimately stepping on your toes. You hadn't commented on the request yet when I decided to just do the rationale myself and started the process of uploading the image, and I didn't notice your comment until I'd already uploaded it and went to go accept the request. Have a good day! Face-smile.svg --Nick⁠—⁠Contact/Contribs 21:48, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You're absolutely fine to do that, no harm done. My personal belief is in two parts. 1) I feel it is their responsibility to do more than drop a request on the page and abandon it forever. 2) I like to have their beliefs on the fair use rationale. Since I am uploading it for them, I'm already taking responsibility for the photo. I never want to be questioned about why I made a decision without there being a paper trail for me to follow. In this case it was pretty cut and dry and we would've ended up at the same point. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 21:51, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png For being very helpful and thinking outside the box. Samf4u (talk) 01:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Restore CodeProject Logo.gif.[edit]

Please restore the image. I fixed the licensing of the image on the same day that the possibly un-free inquiry was made, so I would like the image to be restored. Thanks. Kamran Mackey (talk) 09:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

You added a fair use rationale but there was no license. Every file has to have a license. Determine which (non-free) license you think fits best and let me know. I'll restore it and add the appropriate license. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 13:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)