User talk:Damiens.rf

This talk page is not a battle ground

Please, stay cool.

Image listed for deletion

In reply to your listing the image Image:Johan Helsingius.jpg for deletion: the original copyright message has been added with an added explanation on the copyright status. Please also see the comment on the Images and media for deletion page.

This should satisfy the standing guidelines, please un-list the image for deletion.

review

please review the article V (programming language)

Camel Trophy Photos

Hi there, thanks for informing me about the copyright information required for the photos I uploaded as a gallery on the Camel Trophy page. I have the required information (website links) How do I add this information to the pictures? I appreciate that you directed me to the media copyright page for questions but this isn't particularly helpful. Thanks for your help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Superbencooper (talk • contribs)

Response to Images

I took the images from a Camel trophy website. I now that currently they will not be allowed here but I have contacted the Camel Trophy site webmaster for permission. If permission is granted can I then upload the photos? Thanks for your help and advice.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Superbencooper (talk • contribs)

Replied

Hello, Damiens.rf. You have new messages at Redthoreau's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Image undelete request

Dear Damiens.rf Just a quick request regarding the image which was deleted from the file File:John-Serry-Sr.gif which was deleted from the infobox on the article John Serry, Sr.. If possible kindly arrange for the administrator/editor to undelete this image for fair use as a copyrighted historical photo of a noteworthy musician. I failed to explain during the debate that the image should be tagged for fair use in the article John Serry, Sr. since it:

1. its inclusion in the article would add significantly to the article since the photograph of the subject and its historical significance are the subject of discussion in the article.
2. the photo itself is of historical significance due to the historic musical contributions of the musician during the early 20th century
3. it illustrate an educational article about the entity the accordion which was used as a classical orchestra instrument-not a folk instrument
4. it is not replacable with an uncopyrighted or freely copyrighted photo of the musician of comparable value.

I appologize for not including these remarks during the deletion review--alas I am totally unfamiliar with the deletion process and not very adept at editing articles. If possible- kindly arrange for a restoration of the image found in the deleted file. If this is no longer possible, would you be able to post an Image Undelete request for me?? I am not certain how to propose such an action. Many thanks for your help. Sincerely pjs012915--Pjs012915 (talk) 15:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)pjs012915

Hi, pjs. Believe me, it won't be easy to have that image on the article. To begin with, the image was deleted primarily because the copyright holder and author were unknown, and you're not addressing this in your 4 points argumentations above.

Besides that, point #1 and #3 are not enough to justify the use of non-free images. Item #2 is mistaken. Historical images are images that are famous themselves, like famous paintings or award-winning photographies. Item #4 is also wrong when you understand that "comparable value" should be restricted to the value that this image serves Wikipedia, i.e., to illustrate the person.

That said, deletion review is a process to remedy bad deletion-discussions closings by admins, and not to extend or repeat the deletion discussion itself.

Pjs, I'm sure you have a nice picture of your father you took yourself. Why don't you release it under a free license? --Damiens.rf 20:17, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Dear Damiens.rf - Thank you once again for your insights. Again I must apologize for my ignorance regarding copyright issues and the policies which Wikipedia utilizes in order to regulate images which are presented in the encyclopedia. Alas, I am quite ignorant of the technical issues involved. If possible, kindly reconsider the decision to delete the photograph in light of the following thoughts:

1. I guess that I disagree with the conclusion that the photograph is not historically valuable. Images of this musician were circulated for promotional purposes by several accordion manufacturers from the 1930's through the 1960's, as well as by the CBS network while he performed live at CBS for Voice of America in the 1940s. In addition,

this musician's image was published in A Pictorial History of Radio (See John Serry, Sr. references) which documents images of noted performers in the history of radio. While the deleted image is not identical to those cited above, it is significant in that it portrays the same historical figure in his professional capacity. Its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because the photo (depicting the use of the accordion by the musician as a legitimate orchestral instrument) and its historical significance (in the sense that few musicians of that era attempted to utilize the instrument in this fashion --See Accordion (Use in classical music)) are the object of discussion in the parent article John Serry, Sr.. As such it is both illustrative and educational and serves as a valuabe enhancement to the article.

1. To the best of my knowledge,the photograph was prepared by a professionally trained photographer and professor of architecture/interior design (Robert J. Serry) who was one of the subject's sons. It was prepared solely for educational purposes for the benefit of the musician's students in his studio and copyrighted for this purpose only. In so far as it was conceived as a purely educational tool to document the musician's contributions to the advancement of music, it seems appropriate to incorporate it within the parent article.
2. It should also be noted that the photograph does include a clear instrument logo on the accordion which was itself protected under copyright and trademark restrictions by the manufacturer. As such, the photograph is worthy of being categorized as a protected image under copyright and trademark provisions. A free use image of the musician cannot be utilized to convey his utilization of this accordion in his professional attempts to advance the use of Stradella accordion and Free bass system accordion the realm of classical music.
3. In addition, I am not able to upload a free use image of the musician which depicts his professional activities on any of the accordions which he utilized in his professional activities since they also utilize logos and are protected by the manufacturer's trademarks.

Thanks again for your insights. I hope that this helps to clarify my thoughts for the benefit of the editors. Sorry that I cannot be of much more assistance. I appreciate your efforts to salvage the image for the benefit of future students of the instrument. Thanks again. --Pjs012915 (talk) 21:40, 4 April 2009 (UTC)pjs012915

Assistance

Having read the guidelines for the WP:BLP I see that information is meant to be unbiased and factual. I feel that you are inflicting a bias by deleting and rewording based on your opinions in the Nikol Hasler article. There is no need to threaten that I am in any violation of terms. As you ask for citations, it is being clarified that either the citation exists or your opinion based changes, such as "this person is not known" are being removed.BeforeSwine (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeforeSwine (talk • contribs) 21:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

The onus is still yours to prove she's an "Internet Personality" and that she is "known".--Damiens.rf 21:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Assistance, please. If it is your desire to make all of Wiki better in reference of public pools of knowledge, how would you define someone as known and reference it? Given the amount of information available in any search regarding this person, it is not difficult to see that "internet personality" is fitting.BeforeSwine (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeforeSwine (talk • contribs) 21:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, sir, you are demanding that every bit of information have a reference. What prompted a reference of the person's biographical location to be deleted?BeforeSwine (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeforeSwine (talk • contribs) 21:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)