User talk:Epolk: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:19, 16 May 2007

Image:20K Leagues Under the Sea - WDW.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:20K Leagues Under the Sea - WDW.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. —Pilotguy (ptt) 20:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Big thunder wdw.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Big thunder wdw.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. —Pilotguy (ptt) 23:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Error

OK - thanks for reporting it - I'll fix it (it's a single space in the wrong place, apparantely) :( Martinp23 17:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK - all fixed in v.0.8.5.6 of the program. Martinp23 17:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: The Cabinet; Leyla Milani; Krum High School; Metropolitan School District of Lawrence Township; Motherless Brooklyn; Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi; Trout Fishing in America; WCWM; Bugulumbya Secondary School; Mount Anville Secondary School; Participation (decision making); Opuzen; Playboy; Youthink; Gary Morris; Howard High School; Nevada gubernatorial election, 2006; Thing (comics); Jack Lanza

Cleanup: The Bone Collector; Joey Styles; Hazelwood Schools
Merge: Flexible baton round; Hank Williams, Jr.; Mark (weight)
Add Sources: WWE Diva Search; Criterion validity; Additional Member System
Wikify: Flowers in the Attic; Southcoast Academy of Martial Arts; Sweatt v. Painter
Expand: Union Public Service Commission; Cheadle, Greater Manchester; Sequestration

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 18:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:3par logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:3par 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 16:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thank You for your thorough corrections Karoly Szabo. My english is not enough. I was born in Hungary and live in Germany. Tamas Szabo 04:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Guywire.jpg

Hi Epolk, you found this image on www.fcc.gov, i want to upload it to commons, but can't find it on the fcc website, can you point me to the right location ? thanks. Mion 01:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the FCC removed the section of the site that this image was on. You can find at Archive.org: http://web.archive.org/web/20051116170231/www.fcc.gov/year2000/tower.html.

Epolk 04:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thanks Epolk. Mion 08:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2nd Canadian Regiment

Please check this edit. Thanks! Katr67 22:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		I'd like to award this for tireless efforts in correcting mistakes and typos, amazing work! Gaius Cornelius 12:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! It's nice to us Wikignomes being recognized. Epolk 17:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Gaius Cornelius 19:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gfdllogo.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Gfdllogo.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Dead_can_dance_-_host_of_the_seraphim.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dead_can_dance_-_host_of_the_seraphim.ogg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 09:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Fantasmic_theme.ogg

I have tagged Image:Fantasmic_theme.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 13:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Illuminations_score.ogg

I have tagged Image:Illuminations_score.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 15:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:One_Little_Spark.ogg

I have tagged Image:One_Little_Spark.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 21:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief! I give up! Some Wikipedians are becoming so picky about everything that is put on that I am beginning to wonder if this site is being run by lawyers.

I followed ALL of the guidelines that were part of the sample guidelines at the time that I uploaded these samples but SOMEONE keeps coming up with reasons to delete things.

And now we can't upload pictures of buildings that MIGHT have been designed by someone somewhere. Or pictures that show ANY people. Or pictures that might have anything that could possibly be identified as being to any specific place. This site is very soon only going to be able to have pictures of rocks and sound samples of static as anything else MIGHT be able to be remotely identified with some being, known or unknown, that exists somewhere. And pretty soon, someone will make an argument that rocks and static were created by some greater power or intelligent designer or something so we won't even be able to have those either.

Please, delete all of my stuff since I am done uploading anything here. I am tired of having to jump through hoops to justify every little thing. Enjoy the text-only encyclopedia.

Epolk 04:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Unwoman_Envy.ogg

I have tagged Image:Unwoman_Envy.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 07:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:ShakspeareFan002

Saw your message on their talk page. I'm 100% in agreement with you, and a major reason I mostly quit is copyright paranoia. The fights I went through getting Pink Floyd to FA over having a simple picture of the band at the top of the article were downright moronic.

I just want to point out that this particular jackass has obviously decided to pad the crap out of their edit count by tagging media with this May 4 2006 policy message. Editcountitis is ruining the Wikipedia more than anything, because people create and use this bureaucracy in order to have tags they can apply to articles and increase their edit count. Most problems I had on Pink Floyd were the result of one edit-counting jackass. As a result of this guy, who has contributed nothing of any relevance to the entire project, they lost me, who had gone through the most difficult, time-intensive and useful process in the entire project (WP:FAC), created many new articles, and made substantial edits to many pages.

This ShakespeareFan002, while not the one I had my old troubles with, seems particularily egregious. I'd estimate thousands of edits with no actual content, just tagging stuff with bureaucratic bullshit. You'd think a Shakespeare fan would spend more time improving most of the woefully bad Shakespeare-related articles on here rather than hassling people uploading 20-second song clips.

In addition, they're clearly doing it so fast they're screwing up constantly. The one of mine he tagged with the "applies to media uploaded on or after May 4 2006" was uploaded in Feb. 2006. He fixed his mistake, but I notice he just deleted my comment off their talk page, but didn't archive it - I wonder how many other similar screwups are in his talk page history? Another user got his tagged, despite the fact his fair use rationale appears to be in the media, but wasn't in neat bullet points so this idiot didn't notice. I also notice that he's recieved reproaches for not informing people properly.

People like this protest that they're doing it for the greater good, but if they really cared about the greater good they'd fix the problems themselves, rather than slapping a tag on to make it someone else's problem. What makes it worse is that at least the people who run around stub-sorting to boost their edits don't hurt anyone. These tags this guy is slapping on are only seen (usually) by the person who uploaded it, and if they're not around, it's nuked after a week without anyone else getting the chance to see and fix it. On top of that, few people uploading media to the site are copyright experts, and the first time they've ever seen the words "fair use" was on their talk page boilerplate from someone like this, and have no bloody idea what to do about it.

I'm too weary to bother fighting the fight (and anyone noticing some of my previous obscenity-laden rants about this on my talk page would probably disgregard me), but if you still care about the project enough to get involved in the mess of it, I'd suggest looking into this one specific user's history and initiating a WP:RFC or something about him. If you don't have the energy either, maybe you'll come across someone else getting messed with by this person and pass the message along. There's many out there like us, but unfortunately we spend too much time being useful and not enough time chatting on IRC and organizing bureaucracy to band together and fight back. dharmabum 07:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 151: / Line 151: @@
 ==Image:Unwoman_Envy.ogg==
 I have tagged [[:Image:Unwoman_Envy.ogg]] as {{tl|no rationale}}, because it does not provide a [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline|fair use rationale]].  If you believe the image to be acceptable for [[Wikipedia:fair use|fair use]] according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the [[Wikipedia:fair use rationale guideline|fair use rationale guideline]], on [[:Image:Unwoman_Envy.ogg|the image description page]].  Please also consider using {{tlp|non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use]].  Thank you. <!-- Template:Missing rationale short --> [[User:ShakespeareFan00|ShakespeareFan00]] 07:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
+== User:ShakspeareFan002 ==
+Saw your message on their talk page. I'm 100% in agreement with you, and a major reason I mostly quit is copyright paranoia. The fights I went through getting [[Pink Floyd]] to FA over having a simple picture of the band at the top of the article were downright moronic.
+I just want to point out that this particular jackass has obviously decided to pad the crap out of their edit count by tagging media with this May 4 2006 policy message. Editcountitis is ruining the Wikipedia more than anything, because people create and use this bureaucracy in order to have tags they can apply to articles and increase their edit count. Most problems I had on Pink Floyd were the result of '''one''' edit-counting jackass. As a result of this guy, who has contributed nothing of any relevance to the entire project, they lost me, who had gone through the most difficult, time-intensive and useful process in the entire project ([[WP:FAC]]), created many new articles, and made substantial edits to many pages.
+This ShakespeareFan002, while not the one I had my old troubles with, seems particularily egregious. I'd estimate thousands of edits with no actual content, just tagging stuff with bureaucratic bullshit. You'd think a Shakespeare fan would spend more time improving most of the woefully bad Shakespeare-related articles on here rather than hassling people uploading 20-second song clips.
+In addition, they're clearly doing it so fast they're screwing up constantly. The one of mine he tagged with the "applies to media uploaded on or after May 4 2006" was uploaded in Feb. 2006. He fixed his mistake, but I notice he just deleted my comment off their talk page, but didn't archive it - I wonder how many other similar screwups are in his talk page history? Another user got his tagged, despite the fact his fair use rationale appears to be in the media, but wasn't in neat bullet points so this idiot didn't notice. I also notice that he's recieved reproaches for not informing people properly.
+People like this protest that they're doing it for the greater good, but if they really cared about the greater good they'd fix the problems themselves, rather than slapping a tag on to make it someone else's problem. What makes it worse is that at least the people who run around stub-sorting to boost their edits don't hurt anyone. These tags this guy is slapping on are only seen (usually) by the person who uploaded it, and if they're not around, it's nuked after a week without anyone else getting the chance to see and fix it. On top of that, few people uploading media to the site are copyright experts, and the first time they've ever seen the words "fair use" was on their talk page boilerplate from someone like this, and have no bloody idea what to do about it.
+I'm too weary to bother fighting the fight (and anyone noticing some of my previous obscenity-laden rants about this on my talk page would probably disgregard me), but if you still care about the project enough to get involved in the mess of it, I'd suggest looking into this one specific user's history and initiating a [[WP:RFC]] or something about him. If you don't have the energy either, maybe you'll come across someone else getting messed with by this person and pass the message along. There's many out there like us, but unfortunately we spend too much time being useful and not enough time chatting on IRC and organizing bureaucracy to band together and fight back. [[User:Dharmabum420|dharmabum]] 07:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)