User talk:PinchasC

Archive

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 14 days are automatically archived to User_talk:PinchasC/archive. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Pinchas

Thank you for your heads up. I am confused about the copyright business, though it is never my intent to disrupt. It seems that you need to be a lawyer to upload images here. Anyhow I have clarified the position with the three images you queried hopefully to the satisfaction of wikipedia.

However, one of your actions in particular was very disloyal considering a confidence I gave you a month ago.

You pointed out the distinction between cc 2 and 3, something I did not realize, and was not clear when I uploaded it that there was some inferior cc. In your haste, you didn't notice that some of the images were cc 2.0 and allowed for commercial use. Which are fine on wikipedia Template:Cc-by-2.0 - see there. I kindly request that you undelete those ones ASAP. Please be more cautious in future, if you had checked (you claimed that you did) you would have merely changed the tags. Thanks. Lobojo (talk) 22:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

It was not just a matter of the wrong tags. No matter which tag was placed there, these images would not have been allowed as CC 2.0 is only allowed if it is allowed for commercial use. All of the images that you uploaded under the creative commons license clearly state that it is CC 2.0 for non-commercial use only which is not allowed. See Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Free_licenses and this email from Jimbo, these images are to be deleted on sight. Regarding the confidence item, I will send you an email. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

No Pinchas you are incorrect. At least 4 of them did not have that restriction. But you deleted them anyway. Could you please save me the trouble of uploading them again by undeleting them. cc2.0 does not necessarily imply "non-commercial" as I have now found out. Lobojo (talk) 23:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

At the time that I deleted them, all the creative commons ones that you uploaded had the non-commercial restriction (I checked each one). Please reply with the ones that did not have it. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm asuming good faith here, and will say then that when you checked each one you missed the ones that didn't have the NC restrictions. Since I can no longer see the pages, b/c you deleted them it is a lot of work for me to work it out. For you it is easy. Please do this pinchas and don't make me waste time uploading them again. Lobojo (talk) 00:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

All the URL's of the images appear to be in your edit summary when you uploaded the images which can be viewed at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Lobojo

Flickr is down right now, but you should be able to take a look at those images as soon as they are back up. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:13, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, I will try tomorow if I have time. Lobojo (talk) 00:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, Flickr is back up and I rechecked all the images and you are correct that 4 of the images do not currently have the non-commercial requirement. I am sorry for this mistake and I have restored these images. However they do have the wrong license attached to them, so please go and update the licenses. The rest have the non-commercial requirement problem and will therefore remain deleted and should not be re-uploaded. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 03:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much Pinchas, you saved me a job. Lobojo (talk) 14:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Protect

Can you protect the Iswatchbot page that I created. It was an example of a bot user page. Please reply on my user talk. Iswatch20 (talk) 07:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Upper Midwest Merkos - Lubavitch House

An article that you have been involved in editing, Upper Midwest Merkos - Lubavitch House, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Upper Midwest Merkos - Lubavitch House. Thank you. Eliyak T·C 22:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Kehotlogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kehotlogo.jpg. Unfortunately, I think that you have not provided a proper rationale for using this image under "fair use". Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. Note that the image description page must include the exact name or a link to each article the image is used in and a separate rationale for each one. (If a link is used, automated processes may improperly add the related tag to the image. Please change the fair use template to refer to the exact name, if you see this warning.)

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 07:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Rfb participation thanks

Hello, Pinchas.

I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your support. -- Avi (talk) 18:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect

Why don't YOU talk about your problems with the page in the talk page, rather than insert or assist other in asserting completely erroneous information or remove information with citations from Rav Shach's article? This is the not the first time you have demonstrated some serious biad in your edits. You will be blocked if you continue to act like this. Once again, keep your issues in my talk page or the Shach talk page. Thank you. 67.81.155.106 (talk) 12:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting yourself in your last edit. It seems like you now realize what was wrong with your edits. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 12:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Stop trying to be cute. But I thank you for revealing that you are operating with your "feelings" about what is "wrong" rather than facts. This demonstrates that you are not capable of discussing this mater with me in a neutral fashion and that you should not be involved in this matter. If you decide to stay here, no problem. But don;t remove cited sources or simply revert to incorrect or pov articles. Trust me, I can do the same game zero and Yonasan did to Rav Shahc's page on the Rebbe's page. But its wrong, so I don't do it. Please guide yourself accordingly, too. Thank you. 67.81.155.106 (talk) 12:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, you are playing games, pretending to self revert and then adding back in the material. The basic problem with your edits is that you are removing sourced material. You are adding unsourced material which is coming from a non-neutral point of view. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 12:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not playing games, merely correcting mistakes. You are the one adding unsourced material coming from a non-neutral point of view. My input is all sourced and with sources, unlike your comments. Once again, I can easily manipulate Wikipedia rules to insert a huge section of quotes of the rebbe against rav shach and others. You really want this? We can go through each item carefully, or you can continue to lose everyone's respect with your personal political agenda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.155.106 (talk) 13:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

See the comments from Yonason3 left on the talk page at Talk:Elazar_Shach#Recent_editing_of_67.81.155.106_does_not_conform_to_rules for an explanation of what was wrong with your edits. Continue all conversation about your edits to that article on that article's talk page. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)