User talk:SchuminWeb/Archive 31: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
SchuminWeb (talk | contribs) m Fix |
SchuminWeb (talk | contribs) ←Redirected page to User talk:SchuminWeb |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
#REDIRECT [[User talk:SchuminWeb]] |
|||
== [[Wikipedia:Numbers#Numbers_as_figures_or_words]] == |
|||
...your edit [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=RMS_Lusitania&curid=436113&diff=444424009&oldid=444330843 here] doesn't note that the remainder of the sentence goes on to say "or in words if they are expressed in one or two words (16 or sixteen, 84 or eighty-four, 200 or two hundred, but 3.75, 544, 21 million)". In the context of Wikpedia, that's distinguishing the integers from one to ninety-nine without introducing terms such as "integer" or "decimal fraction". Outside Wikipedia, it's easy to find more informative sources, which all give the same advice. [[User:Tedickey|TEDickey]] ([[User talk:Tedickey|talk]]) 19:05, 12 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Power Ranger screencaps == |
|||
Fine, I get it. The ones on the individual color's pages are decorative. But the ones on [[Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies]] are not, as I have told you at least 2 separate times before. Leave the photos there. They are not decorative. They serve an encyclopedic purpose and that is the minimum onus for inclusion as fair use images.—[[User:Ryulong|<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryulong|<font color="Gold">竜龙</font>]]) 18:08, 14 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Yes, they are decorative, as they continue to fail [[WP:NFCC#8]] - they are not the subject of sourced critical commentary within the article, nor are these particular images themselves notable. Non-free content has a very high standard to meet for inclusion, ''by design'', and merely being encyclopedic does not cut it. |
|||
:Additionally, your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Other_Rangers_and_Ranger-like_allies&diff=prev&oldid=444836070 edit summary] for your reversion was uncivil. Please refrain from that sort of conduct in the future. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:35, 14 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::The existence of sourced critical commentary has never been a requirement for having a fair use image of any type within an article. There is nothing within [[WP:NFC]] or [[WP:NFCC]] that has this as part of the site's rules. And the use of these two images within the article is contextually significant, despite your constant accusations against the fact.—[[User:Ryulong|<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryulong|<font color="Gold">竜龙</font>]]) 23:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::I will be seeking a wider audience for how to treat these images on all of the articles, as I have rescinded my agreement on how the images on the individual color's pages are decorative. Identification of fictional characters by means of a fair use image should be allowed.—[[User:Ryulong|<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryulong|<font color="Gold">竜龙</font>]]) 00:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Discussion has been started at WP:ANI under the heading [[WP:ANI#Non-free image issue]], but it may move once someone tells me if we have an NFC noticeboard.—[[User:Ryulong|<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryulong|<font color="Gold">竜龙</font>]]) 00:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== File:Crazy horse memorial == |
|||
please reconsider [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_August_6#File:Crazy_horse_memorial_comparison.jpg]. non free 3D art. this was an old rationale that i expanded after nomination, and credit to sculptor. alternatively there are a dozen to choose from here [http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=Crazy+horse+memorial&l=commderiv&ct=0&mt=all&adv=1] pick one. this is a notable sculpture worthy of one photo. <font face="Vivaldi">[[User:Slowking4| Slowking4]]</font>:[[User_talk:Slowking4| 7@1|x]] 20:18, 14 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Deleted due to concerns about sourcing and attribution. Will not be restoring. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:36, 14 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::so what you're saying is, because he did not tag it "non free 3D art", then you cannot believe it's his own work? well, flickr replacement only slightly differing is now uploaded. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Crazy-horse-comparison.jpg]. what was the purpose of this exercise? <font face="Vivaldi">[[User:Slowking4| Slowking4]]</font>:[[User_talk:Slowking4| 7@1|x]] 14:26, 15 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::what's your problem: it clearly had "Attribution: Mike Tigas" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Crazy-horse-comparison.jpg] do you want me to elevate this? <font face="Vivaldi">[[User:Slowking4| Slowking4]]</font>:[[User_talk:Slowking4| 7@1|x]] 17:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::The sculptor needs attribution as well - not just the photographer, since this is a derivative work due to lack of FOP for sculptures in the US. Source that or else it will be deleted again. Additionally, your threatening tone of "do you want me to elevate this?" is uncivil. Please do not continue such behaviors. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 17:50, 15 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Temporarily restored image speedily deleted again == |
|||
Sorry to bother you, but the image [[:File:Burj Khalifa view from Palace Hotel.jpg]] has been speedily deleted once again after {{admin|Jimfbleak}} temporarily restored it specifically so I could work on its fair-use rationale. For the relevant discussion see: [[User talk:Astronaut#Deleted image]] and [[User talk:Jimfbleak#Deleted image disappeared rather quickly]]. Unfortunately, I have been on holiday and without internet access and only found out about this today. I'm back from my holiday now, so would it be possible to temporarily restore it again? Many thanks. [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 13:36, 17 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== 3RR == |
|||
I have not violated 3RR on any of these pages because I have only made two total reverts, excluding the self reverting I did. The Goranger photo is not free to use, despite the claim that it was released in the public domain. But if you give me around fifteen minutes I can make something suitable using the [[:File:Wikiranger.png]] templates.—[[User:Ryulong|<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryulong|<font color="Gold">竜龙</font>]]) 23:59, 19 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Question about additions to multiple Massachusetts articles == |
|||
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #f5f3ef; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is closed. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.'' ''A summary of the conclusions reached follows.'' |
|||
::This drama is over. I stand by my decision to block, and believe that this is was a properly-executed block for spamming. Herostratus can say whatever he would like to the blocked user, but I'm not unblocking anyone in this case, and that's the end of it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 05:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
---- <!-- from Template:discussion top--> |
|||
Hi Ben. I just stumbled upon that fact that this editor ( [[User:Jm1106]] ) has added the same link (made to behave local to a community) in many articles on towns in southeastern Massachusetts. To wit, see [[Special:Contributions/Jm1106]]. It feels like it's commercial, as these links are the only edits by this editor and seem to be fiddly. It appears like a thinly veiled mass mailing into WP articles. Any thoughts? If so, can any admin actions be appropriately taken? Best Wishes. --- (Bob) [[User:Wikiklrsc|Wikiklrsc]] ([[User talk:Wikiklrsc|talk]]) 02:01, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Oh, dear... seems we have a spammer on our hands. Blocked. Going in to revert now... [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 02:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::And reverted. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 02:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks very much for having a look and acting, Ben. It seemed clear but two sets of eyes are better than one, most of the time. Best wishes. --- (Bob) [[User:Wikiklrsc|Wikiklrsc]] ([[User talk:Wikiklrsc|talk]]) 02:58, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
* I strongly recommend you revert those edits back. The link placed in several of those articles I see - and, likely, in all of them - are to southeastern Massachusetts' daily newspaper. This is especially troubling in so far as the editor ''said what he was doing in most of the edit summaries'', and that an immediate indef block was slammed down on him for doing so. It's regrettable that neither of you seem to have attempted to contact the editor to ask what he was about, nor - as far as I can see - sought to determine through any inquiries whether the link had any validity. (Beyond that, I'm rather surprised that Wikiklrsc, whose edit history includes a number of southeastern Massachusetts-based topics, overlooked the probability that www.patriotledger.com is the site for the ''Quincy Patriot-Ledger'') [[User:Ravenswing|'''<span style="background:Blue;color:Cyan"> ῲ Ravenswing ῴ </span>''']] 03:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::I know The Patriot Ledger newspaper well. I didn't overlook that. The nature of the adds, and the multiplicity of the adds into so many southeastern Massachusetts articles, seemed odd given it was billed as "All You Need To Know" with a sub-page of the town. It's perfectly reasonable to cite The Patriot Ledger. It's quite respectable on the South Shore. But look at what was put into so many articles and why. No citation. Just a "All You Need To Know about (town)" and lots of pop-up advertisements, although there was some local information, kind of. That's why I asked Ben Schumin, whose opinion I've sought many times over the Wiki-years, to have a look and tell me what he thought or could do, if anything, about it. --- [[User:Wikiklrsc|Wikiklrsc]] ([[User talk:Wikiklrsc|talk]]) 04:00, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yeah, this seemed a clear case of spamming to me, and I'm going to stand by it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::Tell me this: '''what is he spamming''? Is he spamming the papers themselves? If that's your position, that's crazy. I often add links to the local papers for articles on small towns. Should we not do this, on the ground that it increases the papers' visibility? So what? The same criteria could be applied to any link to the [[New York Times]] or any other commercial entity. Right? If your position is that he's spamming a particular product that is advertised by these papers, color me dubious and please, tell me what the product is? Look, we all make mistakes, fine, we're all busy, let's set this right, OK? [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 04:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::They are spamming the newspaper, specifically their "Answer Book" section. Newspapers are great for cites, but when you're adding a link like that en masse all over the place that drops to a page basically advertising the newspaper, you are spamming. Doesn't have to be an enlarge-your-you-know-what ad to be spamming. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Facts: Upon reflection, Ben stands by his block and revert decisions as an English Wikipedia administrator whilst [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] has prolifically apologized to the user on the user's talk page ( [[User Talk:Jm1106]] ), and also [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] has re-inserted the link back into the [[Hingham, Massachusetts]] article. --- [[User:Wikiklrsc|Wikiklrsc]] ([[User talk:Wikiklrsc|talk]]) 05:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.''<!-- from Template:discussion bottom --></div> |
|||
== What's the deal with [[User:Jm1106]]? == |
|||
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #f5f3ef; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is closed. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.'' ''A summary of the conclusions reached follows.'' |
|||
::See above discussion close. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 05:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
---- <!-- from Template:discussion top--> |
|||
What's going on with [[User:Jm1106]]? I see that he added (what looks to me to be) a perfectly useful and acceptable link at [[Hingham, Massachusetts]], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hingham%2C_Massachusetts&action=historysubmit&diff=446058498&oldid=444492739 here]. Maybe I'm missing something, but a quick look indicates that the link 1) contains cogent and useful information, and 2) is published in the [[Patriot Ledged]], a respected paper in a small city ([[Quincy, Massachusetts]]) that goes back to 1837 (or 1916, depending on how you count). |
|||
Not only that, but you ''blocked'' the user for adding (what, not having checked, I assume to be) similar links in a number of articles. How about giving the guy a note of thanks instead of a no-warning permablock, hm?? |
|||
Granted, these edits were apparently tagged by a robot as "Tag: repeated addition of external links by non-autoconfirmed user", and while I for one welcome our new robot overlords, the robot didn't make the block; you did, for "spamming or advertising". I recognize that the Patriot Ledger ''is'' a commercial, for-profit enterprise and the links may even contain ads, but... this is also true of the [[New York Times]], [[The Econmist]], and so forth. Are we not going to be allowed to link to these entities now, or what? |
|||
Maybe I'm missing something, and if so I'm willing to be educated; but if I'm not, don't you think a reversal of the block, a restoration of the links, and an apology and explanation to the editor is in order, along with maybe a expression of thanks for his contributions?? [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 04:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
OK I hadn't seen the above thread, where apparently you're ''declining'' to set this right. Wrong answer. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 04:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.''<!-- from Template:discussion bottom --></div> |
|||
== Reply to your message concerning mu message on twinkle page == |
|||
As you know I am new and just find my feet my article which I have extensively corrected is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_sexual_jurisprudence |
|||
and some others which you can check out from my talk page. First I went to twinkle page as it was what I thought was the area to respond in as the page of the article said it needed major clean up by an expert. I felt I could assist. If I am on wrong pages or doing things wrong I happily will mend my ways.[[User:Mhakcm|Mhakcm]] ([[User talk:Mhakcm|talk]]) 20:39, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:As far as I can tell, you added material in good faith, though you were reverted due to lack of citations on the new material. See [[WP:V]] and [[WP:CITE]] for more on why it's necessary to cite sources, and how to do it well. |
|||
:As far as the venue goes, every article has a talk page associated with it. Thus if the article is called "Foo", the talk page for said article would be "Talk:Foo". Thus for [[Islamic sexual jurisprudence]], you would go to [[Talk:Islamic sexual jurisprudence]] to discuss improvements to that article. For tools like [[Wikipedia:Twinkle|Twinkle]], the talk page is generally used for discussion about improvements to the tool itself, i.e. if Twinkle is malfunctioning or what have you, or suggestions for a new feature for Twinkle. |
|||
:Let me know if that makes sense, or if I need to clarify some points. Thanks! [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks that makes sense, but I need clarification on what is twinkle and what is it for?[[User:Mhakcm|Mhakcm]] ([[User talk:Mhakcm|talk]]) 15:06, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Basically, Twinkle is a collection of user scripts that allows editors to revert vandalism, warn users, nominate pages for deletion, place maintenance tags on articles, place tags on images, and a few other things that I'm probably not remembering at the moment. More complete information about the tool can be found at [[Wikipedia:Twinkle]], and the easiest way to add Twinkle for your use is by going to [[Special:Preferences|your preferences]], going to the "Gadgets" tab, checking the box for Twinkle, and then saving your changes. It's a very powerful tool, and very useful to have around. I think I've been using Twinkle for about five years now, and it's a really big help. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 18:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== ANI == |
|||
You probably want to know that you are being discussed on ANI [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#re_User:Jm1106|here]].[[User:Nigel Ish|Nigel Ish]] ([[User talk:Nigel Ish|talk]]) 09:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Why am I not surprised about this one. Thanks for letting me know. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 13:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Friendly request == |
|||
Would you consider listing yourself at [[Wikipedia:Administrator review]]? You've been an admin for four years now, it'd be beneficial to get some feedback on how you're doing, I would think. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 17:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:No. I sense a user who has an axe to grind about an administrative action I made that he disagreed with, and I'm not about to be that person's grindstone. Get over it, already. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 17:56, 26 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::OK, well, your call. I'm not as concerned about any particular admin actions as your refusal to consider or discuss them, and in the most inflammatory terms possible. I don't know you and don't much care how you treat ''me'', but if this is a ''pattern'' then that's a problem for various reasons, in my opinion. This is what I'm trying to determine. |
|||
::Since you don't want to undertake administrator, review, I don't expect this next suggestion to meet with your approval, so I suppose this is a formality, but: I propose to nominate you for [[WP:RFA]]. Since you're already an admin, this would be a reconfirmation RfA. Do you accept? And if not, will you accept on the signature of six editors (each having over 500 edits and over one month of tenure) petitioning you to do so? (You're not in [[:Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall]], but if you were this would be the default standard for triggering a reconfirmation RfA). Since you're not in [[:Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall]] you don't have to accept, but you can if you like. You've nothing to fear from this process if your admin career has been OK, determining which would be the point of this exercise. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 04:27, 27 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::I am finished playing your little game. So, no. '''STOP HARASSING ME.''' [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:31, 27 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::OK, I hear you loud and clear. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 04:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Tathva == |
|||
I see that you have recently deleted the article [[Tathva]]. Well, i know that the article was so poorly written that it did not even assert its notability. It is the technical festival of a premier [[National Institutes of Technology|NIT]]. All Other NITs have article on their techfests ([[Engineer (Technical Fest)]], [[Technozion]] to name a few). None is more or less notable than the other. Either you have to undelete the [[Tathva]] article and let me improve it or act by the same principle on the other articles on same line. Let me know what you think. |
|||
PS: I know you were acting on a PROD and not solely on your judgment. |
|||
'''[[User:Arjun024|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:14px">Arjun</span>]]'''[[User talk:Arjun024|<span style="font-family:Lucida Console;font-size:14px"><sup>codename'''024'''</sup></span>]] 11:36, 28 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:As a proposed deletion, the article is restored on reasonable request, and so it is done. There's actually a lot of material in that deleted article! I'd say you have your work cut out for you. I'm guessing there will probably be a bit of pruning to do. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 14:52, 28 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks. I will get to the article once i get time. '''[[User:Arjun024|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:14px">Arjun</span>]]'''[[User talk:Arjun024|<span style="font-family:Lucida Console;font-size:14px"><sup>codename'''024'''</sup></span>]] 19:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== AKEV == |
|||
The article for [[AKEV]] was deleted. I disagree with your decision and would like to reinstate the article. AKEV is an established organization for breastfeeding promotion in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, and a few other countries of the former USSR. The article for this type of an organization as well as the field itself was comparable or above the standard for a typical article of this sort. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_West_%28lactation_consultant%29, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Alliance_for_Breastfeeding_Action, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Leche_League, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Breastfeeding_Association, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactation_consultant, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Rose_Tully.[[User:НаташаВ|НаташаВ]] ([[User talk:НаташаВ|talk]]) 02:51, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:It clearly fit the A7 speedy deletion criterion, having made no assertion of notability. I will not be restoring. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:28, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:: Subjective call. There was evidence presented on the sujbect albeit probably not in the language you can read or assess. AKEV is no different from WABA, LLLI, ABA or similar organizations in the West. Per notability article deletion is the last resort. You should ssk the article's creator or an expert on the subject for advice on where to look for sources. Place a notability tag on the article to alert other editors. If the article is about a specialized field, use the expert-subject tag with a specific WikiProject to attract editors knowledgeable about that field, who may have access to reliable sources not available online. Please reconsider.[[User:НаташаВ|НаташаВ]] ([[User talk:НаташаВ|talk]]) 17:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Image size reduction == |
|||
Hi there. You recently tagged a file with {{tl|non-free reduce}} or {{tl|reduce}} that was, in fact, within acceptable size for fair use images. Standard practice places the maximum size at 160,000 pixels, which is 400x400 in a square image. However, 500x320, 600x266, etc. are also 160,000 pixels, and are acceptable. DASHbot, the program that does almost all image resizing, actually won't even bother with files that come out to less than 160,000 pixels, so chances are low that the files will ever be reduced anyways. If you really want a file smaller than 160,000 pixels reduced, you can do it easily with the free program [[Paint.NET]] (what I use), or ask me directly. |
|||
Just letting you know for the future, [[User:Sven Manguard|<font color="207004"><big>'''S</big>ven <big>M</big>anguard'''</font>]] [[User talk:Sven Manguard|<small><font color="F0A804">'''Wha?'''</font></small>]] 14:02, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== [[:File:Highway Police Vauxhall Monterey.jpg]] == |
|||
Please consider undeleting this file until it has gone through the full process of {{tls|nsd}}... as it stands, the uploader at English Wikipedia doesn't have any way of knowing what the file name is on Commons or how to source it properly. [[User:Magog the Ogre|Magog the Ogre]] ([[User talk:Magog the Ogre|talk]]) 17:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:I actually did a little research on this query, and came up with a surprising result - it's a copyright violation. The source site from the watermark lists "All rights reserved" in its copyright notice, and thus explicitly does not release its material under a free license. A shame, but unfortunately, those are the breaks sometimes. So due to that, I see no reason to undelete locally, since we would have to delete that, too. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 21:09, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== You will be need more help... == |
|||
wrote previously... |
|||
=== Wikipedia List of superpowers article, need more superpowers === |
|||
I have a real article that i work any moment and everyday with any pals... you have rights for use it for your convenence (except erase it or modify it) to show how many super powers exist in your article. |
|||
[http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fes.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAnexo%3ASuperpoderes Super Power List behind Wikipedia from Spanish Leanguage to english leanguage] I work so much, and any pals too, dont destroy own article but almost try to add more super powers to your super power list. If my wikipedia in Spanish article is not without faults of orthography, you could read it without so much problems, Greetings. |
|||
(This for your [[List of Superpowers]]. --[[User:GeoCloaking|Georgy]] ([[User talk:GeoCloaking|talk]]) 18:43, 2 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Cooper Wheelock logos == |
|||
{{Done}}, results at [[WP:GL/I]] (maybe it has been archived, check it). --[[User:Robot8A|Robot8A]] ([[User talk:Robot8A|talk]]) 14:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== [[List of buses]] == |
|||
Are you still sure about the AfD? The table really isn't the same as the navbox. Best, :) [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 03:55, 9 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Template:Ref quantity == |
|||
When significantly changing the wording of a template, please check it's links. [[Template:Ref quantity]] was used on a number of articles expressing concerns about how many refs are used (see [[Wikipedia:Citation overkill]]). Recent changes and renaming imply that the citations have verifications problems instead. This has been corrected but I wanted to give you a heads up to check this in the future before making significant changes like this. At least discuss it on the talk page first.--[[User:RadioFan|RadioFan]] ([[User talk:RadioFan|talk]]) 12:19, 12 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Empire Builder == |
|||
Hello there! I answered your request on [[Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Photography_workshop#Empire_Builder_paint_scheme]]. I hope you like it. Cheers! -- [[User:Orionist|<font color="#0066CC">'''Orionist'''</font>]] ★ [[User talk:Orionist|<font color="#0066CC">talk</font>]] 13:55, 12 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Love it! Thanks much. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 16:54, 12 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== AWB tool warning == |
|||
Hi SchuminWeb - just wanted to make you aware of a [[Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Do we really need the Warning banner|discussion]] regarding the {{tl|tool warning}} template you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAutoWikiBrowser&action=historysubmit&diff=446524614&oldid=445002248 added] on [[WP:AWB]], in case you're not watching the page. Thanks! [[User:GoingBatty|GoingBatty]] ([[User talk:GoingBatty|talk]]) 01:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Ah, this makes me laugh. It's a fairly standard warning that goes across a lot of tools, and it's funny that the AWB people are going batty over it. It wasn't my intention to make anyone crazy by placing the tag, but the resulting discussion *is* funny. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 02:05, 13 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== You're deleting files too soon == |
|||
FFD files get '''more than''' seven days for discussion according to the header of [[WP:FFD]]; files from the 11th can be deleted on the 19th, not the 18th. –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 21:49, 18 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Perhaps too soon on some, but realize that your interpretation goes against common practice. "More than seven days" also can be taken to mean "seven days and thirty seconds", which is more in line with common practice. Your suggestion of waiting eight days will need to be brought to a larger discussion. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 07:19, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Eh, reasonable enough. I had assumed that this was the general policy because AnomieBot updates the deletion holding cell once the discussion is 8 days old. Is that just a problem with the bot? –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 12:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Not a problem with the bot, but the way it's sectioned off can be a little weird if you're not familiar with. The ones that are not within a day of being eligible for closing are transcluded. Then the ones that are within a day of being closing are linked and become eligible for closing once the clock ticks over based on the nomination time. The holding cell you're talking about is when they are past time and are actually overdue for being closed, i.e. that's the backlog. The goal is to close these things before they enter the backlog. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 14:21, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::Ah, gotcha. –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 15:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Undelete requests == |
|||
<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #f5f3ef; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is closed. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.'' ''A summary of the conclusions reached follows.'' |
|||
::This is becoming a pile-on, and the new comment is unrelated to the existing discussion. If you have any new concerns, please bring this up in a separate thread addressed to me. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 01:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
---- <!-- from Template:discussion top--> |
|||
Undelete requests (no doubt first of many) |
|||
*; [[File:3 Daft Monkeys 01.jpg]] [[WP:Files_for_deletion/2011_September_11#File:3 Daft Monkeys 01.jpg]] |
|||
:This was tagged for deletion in the Fastily mass-nomination with the boilerplate nomination "Orphaned, Low Quality, No foreseeable use.", none of which holds up per policy. It was keep !voted by [[user:Xeno|Xeno]] and was also in use on an article [[3 Daft Monkeys]]. Please restore. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 09:01, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
*; <strike>[[File:2n2222A and schema.jpg]] [[WP:Files_for_deletion/2011_September_11#File:2n2222A and schema.jpg]] |
|||
: Tagged, once again, with the weak boilerplate "Orphaned, Low Quality, No foreseeable use.", none of which is accurate. |
|||
: Two editors !voted Keep, yet were ignored. We already have an article for [[2N2222]] specifically, an image of a transistor, its case, and the relationship to its circuit diagram is valuable anyway. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 09:11, 19 September 2011 (UTC); </strike> |
|||
:: Now at Commons anyway |
|||
*; [[File:3rd Baron Baden-Powel.JPG]] [[WP:Files_for_deletion/2011_September_11#File:3rd Baron Baden-Powel.JPG]] |
|||
: A figure both of the British aristocracy, and of some significance within the Scouting movement. Once again, the weak boilerplate "Orphaned, No foreseeable use." (not even a claim of low quality this time) was used and other editor's !votes to keep were ignored. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 09:21, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
*:Addressing these as a group, Xeno's !votes on these were discounted across the board because the same comment was added wholesale to every single comment, plus the reasoning goes against longstanding practice on en.wiki, where low quality and orphanedness are valid reasons for deletion. If the files were so useful, why didn't Xeno move them to Commons? Likewise, your !vote on [[:File:2n2222A and schema.jpg]] was without any sort of discussion, and so it was also discounted. Remember that this is not a vote, but rather a discussion. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 09:48, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::: ''because the same comment was added wholesale to every single comment'' |
|||
::: Sorry, was that in reference to Xeno, or to Fastily's nomination? I did raise this very issue at [[WP:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive227#Please_stop_deleting_images_for_reasons_contrary_to_policy]], ''"'why can't you simply say "keep" in FFDs?' Because editors wishing to keep content are required to maintain higher standards than those wishing to delete them."'', where both Nyttend and Fut Perf. expressed the view that simply stating keep was significant (not that I expected that to be the case, either then or now). |
|||
::: I would agree with your broad point here, boilerplate comments either pro- or contra- are inadequate. Yet here we see a massive nomination with the very feeblest of repeated justifications across each file, and it appears to have gone through on the nod. There certainly wasn't any checking if files were in use. |
|||
::: [[:File:286x215 px Child-Labor.JPG]] had three separate editors comment on it, yet the final deletion was unexplained and appears to have paid little note to the arguments either way. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 10:00, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Hi, I'd like to ask you to take a look at two more: |
|||
*[[Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 September 11#File:2812--Flowers-Hearst Castle-2.JPG]] |
|||
*[[Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 September 11#File:5 PalestineGaza Protester at Anaheim, Ca 1 4 09.jpg]] |
|||
I've read your comments just above, and I'm sympathetic to your decision to discount comments that were made ''en masse'', but I think that these two discussions were ones where there were additional keep comments that were specific to the files, and these keep comments were never refuted, and there were no comments supporting the original nomination to delete. Thanks. --[[User:Tryptofish|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish|talk]]) 18:02, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Both of those were moved to Commons, but under different names. The new names on both of those are in the deletion log entry for them. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:20, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::Thanks. Just as a friendly suggestion, I've noticed that some other closers indicate in their closing statements that it was an F8 closure or the like, and I wouldn't have bothered you about it if I had seen something like that. --[[User:Tryptofish|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish|talk]]) 17:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::If you end up going through the nominations from the 12th, and the next few days, note that both Quadell and I !voted keep on all of Fastily's nominations in the first such nomination. Plenty of them should be deleted, but far too many images have been nominated to review every one. One of these next few days has over 600 images nominated; how can any editor, or even any small group of editors, review that many images? If you're closing the nominations, I urge you to close them as "no consensus (default to keep)", allowing for their further review. They can be easily nominated for deletion again in the future at a more reasonable rate of speed. –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 23:44, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::I see a few problems with your rationale: |
|||
:::#Wikipedia is a collaborative project. The responsibility does not fall on any one editor or small group of editors to review FFD nominations. Thus you could have hundreds or thousands of users review these things. The fact that they have not means that these files are likely not that important to the project. |
|||
:::#Deletion discussions are a week long for a reason, in order to allow sufficient time for many users to review the content and participate in the discussions. If you really wanted to review the images, you would have. A week is more than ample time. It doesn't take long to review an image, decide whether it's a keeper or a dumper, and then discuss its merits. |
|||
:::#If you are really serious about keeping all of these images, then you should move them to Commons. Again, a week is more than adequate time to do this. Most of these are free images that we're dealing with, and it is not considered untoward to move an image to Commons and nominate it for speedy deletion as F8 while an FFD discussion is going on, though I suspect that most of these images aren't worth moving. |
|||
:::#I don't take well to whining in deletion discussions. I am not going to close a discussion "no consensus" because people are whining that someone has listed too many files. Nowhere in the rules does it specify a limit to the number of nominations that someone can make, and I refuse to make or enforce a de facto rule to that effect. |
|||
:::Take that as you wish, I suppose, but I think that the truly concerned person would have put more effort into discussion rather than whining about the amount of nominations and arguing that as a reason to invalidate the entire process. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 02:30, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::I second ShuminWeb's views, and thank him for his efforts, but I will no longer be mass nominating files. -'''[[User:Fastily|<span style='font-family: "Trebuchet MS"; color:#4B0082'><big>F</big><small>ASTILY</small></span>]]''' <sup><small>[[User talk:Fastily|<span style = 'color:#4B0082'>(TALK)</span>]]</small></sup> 03:18, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I have only limited time to edit Wikipedia. Although I'd gladly contribute to reviewing some images each day, I don't want it to take up the entirety of my on-wiki time (which I largely contribute ''because I enjoy it''). Is a week seriously long enough for people to review 1000+ completely unrelated images? |
|||
:::::Anyways, I guess you're going to do what you're going to do. I'll just be starting to restore the images and moving them to Commons as time permits. It seems like a waste of energy to delete and then restore and move them rather than just moving them in the first place, but, whatever. I do find it interesting, SchuminWeb, that you said "It doesn't take long to review an image, decide whether it's a keeper or a dumper, and then discuss its merits.", when it seems that Fastily was just alphabetically going through [[:Category:Orphan images]] and nominating ''everything'' with no unique explanation of the reason for deletion. –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 15:13, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::::My discussion centered specifically on your lack of action in defending images that you allegedly wanted to keep, assuming Fastily's nominations as "what's done is done". Reason is because without the nominations (which I agree with), your lack of action would be moot. Also, before you start restoring images and moving them to Commons, please make sure to verify that they do not already exist there or on en.wiki. A number of those images, specifically those with "[number]px-" at the beginning (e.g. "800px-") will likely find a better resolution image if you drop the prefix which was not deleted. Move *that* to Commons, and not the deleted files. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Thanks for the tip. Any idea why the reduced-size images were created? –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 20:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::No idea. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 22:18, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Fastily, I would encourage you to continue to nominate files for deletion, even if that number becomes large at times. Please don't stop your good work just because a bunch of people start whining about a bunch of images that aren't worth keeping in the first place. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Shumin, language like this isn't helpful. Obviously no one is whining about images that aren't worth keeping. Some of us are asking Fastily to please slow down so we can determine which aren't worth keeping and which are. Fastily said he was happy to do this. I do think you ignored consensus when deleting these hundreds of images, and the sarcastic way you're describing the situation indicates that the issue is turning personal with you. It's not a good idea to use admin tools in such situations. – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]])</sup> 17:58, 21 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Fastily, I would encourage you to continue to nominate files for deletion, after checking them to see if they have educational value and moving them to Commons if they do, and/or restricting your nominations to a more manageable number (say, 50-75 per day). Also, you are a good admin from what I've seen, especially in the image area, I just don't agree with these mass nominations of completely unrelated files. –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 20:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
(undenting because the indentation here has gotten far too confusing). SchuminWeb, thank you for stopping the deletions. I'm working on moving files to Commons or !voting for their deletion as my time allows. –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 23:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Unfortunatley Drilnoth, he has gone on another deletion rampage, I really have to side with [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] on this, you're taking this too far. Everything you've deleted on this latest rampage has been a historic railroad image or logo, and you've made false claims that they're replaceable, when in fact they aren't. ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 22:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.''<!-- from Template:discussion bottom --></div> |
|||
== [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion|Nomination for deletion]] of [[Template:Florida Hospitals]] == |
|||
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|30px|link=]][[Template:Florida Hospitals]] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:Florida Hospitals|the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page]].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> I noticed you created the Template:Hospitals in Virginia, can you help save the Florida version? [[User:Mr.Atoz|Mr.Atoz]] ([[User talk:Mr.Atoz|talk]]) 22:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks! [[User:Mr.Atoz|Mr.Atoz]] ([[User talk:Mr.Atoz|talk]]) 00:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
{{Hospitals_Invite}} |
|||
== [[User:Intelati/Warbonnet|Photo]] == |
|||
Ummm... I just [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Intelati/Warbonnet&diff=prev&oldid=452714928 added a ":"] to the photo to remove the photo from the page to save it for the article I'm working on. <nowiki>[[:File:...]]</nowiki> Works for that right? --''[[User:intelati|<span style="background:#FF0000;padding:1px;"><font color="white">intelati</font></span>]][[User talk:intelati|talk]]'' 19:14, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Oh, now I see. Yes, that's fine, and apologies for the confusion. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Didn't want to edit war on my own page. Sorry for the lack of Edit summary for explanation. {{=)}} Good day. ''[[User:intelati|<span style="background:#FF0000;padding:1px;"><font color="white">intelati</font></span>]][[User talk:intelati|talk]]'' 19:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis#2011 Novak Djokovic tennis season|2011 Novak Djokovic tennis season]] == |
|||
You may want to go look at this ongoing discussion, since you were the deleting Admin.[[User:The Gypsy Vagabond Man|The Gypsy Vagabond Man]] ([[User talk:The Gypsy Vagabond Man|talk]]) 03:07, 28 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Thanks for letting me know, though I'm not going to comment on it directly. Your best bet is, since there's a userspace draft going on, to look at the original AFD, and address the concerns raised there. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 03:27, 28 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Wheaton elevator == |
|||
I believe that most people are more interested in learning facts on Wikipedia than on checking the citations. As such, an edit that adds a relevant fact to an article makes Wikipedia more helpful to most users (assuming the fact is actually truthful). The edit we've been reverting back and forth was relevant and truthful, and linked to an article that cited that fact. |
|||
Yes, it would have been better a better edit with a citation. That does not warrant deletion; the edit still did net good. That's just my opinion, but until the community deprecates the [citation needed] tag and deletes every uncited statement, I'm comfortable with it. |
|||
If you were just reverting my edit to challenge me to do it right, well, you succeeded--I have added the citation to the sentence, and I will do so in the future. But you're not going to build a Wikipedian by nitpicking. The attitude of deleting edits that are helpful, but not helpful '''enough''', does not energize me. |
|||
I hope you don't just take this as an extended flame. Thank you--sincerely--for the work you do with Wikipedia; one disagreement doesn't change my appreciation. [[User:SSSheridan|SSSheridan]] ([[User talk:SSSheridan|talk]]) 04:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Thank you for your kind words about my editing work. Please take this point into consideration, however - Wikipedia doesn't operate based on truth, per se. It operates based on verifiability, which means that documentary evidence needs to be cited for any claims that are made. See [[WP:V]] for more information. That's the bottom line, and thank you for providing the source as requested. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:46, 29 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== You deleted a sandbox... == |
|||
I'm sorry, but why did you delete a sandbox [[User:81.221.178.88/Sandbox]] as a test page? '''[[User:Puffin|<font color="teal">Puffin</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:Puffin|<b><sup><small>Let's talk!</small></sup></b>]]'' 19:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Because it was. Up until today, it was at a different title, which was more indicative of its true purpose. I cleared out a whole bunch of similar test pages today at the same time as this one. Also, are you really going to argue that any of that nonsense is actually worth keeping around? [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:42, 29 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Isn't a sandbox a users place to test editing? '''[[User:Puffin|<font color="teal">Puffin</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:Puffin|<b><sup><small>Let's talk!</small></sup></b>]]'' 16:19, 30 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== [[:File:Horn of Africa.png]] == |
|||
Just wondering if you saw the discussion [[File talk:Horn of Africa.png#Disputed fair use rationale|here]] before nominating this file for deletion? Unless I'm completely misunderstanding the policy, it seems pretty clear that this type of usage is permitted. [[User:Danlaycock|TDL]] ([[User talk:Danlaycock|talk]]) 17:23, 30 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:I read it. Doesn't matter, though. There is no reason that this can't be recreated freely. In addition, we have maps such as [[:File:Somaliland-map-en.png]] that illustrate the same thing that we can throw in right away. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Elaine Rapp == |
|||
Dear SchuminWeb, |
|||
Thanks for looking over my article on Elaine Rapp. There's been a lot of misunderstanding about the photo, because it was originally misidentified as non-free use. That was an error on my part, based on an erroneous assumption, since the photo was used in a gallery brochure. In fact, the photo was taken by Elaine Rapp's husband, Stanley Rapp, and is a non-copyrighted free-use photo. This was confirmed for me by Mrs. Rapp herself. So I have restored the photo. I'm not sophisticated enough a Wikipedia user to know how to change the tag to free use, having made my initial error. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ledegraf|Ledegraf]] ([[User talk:Ledegraf|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ledegraf|contribs]]) 03:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:I've taken it off the page for now while we get the licensing situation straightened up. Right now, it's listed non-free, and we technically can't use it per our own guidelines. |
|||
:That said, however, if you do control the copyright to the photo (which I have no reason to think is unreasonable), we need to know what free license you are using to release the photo. The most common licensing options used are: |
|||
:* [[Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0|Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0]] |
|||
:* [[Template:GFDL|GNU Free Documentation License]] |
|||
:* [[Template:PD-user|Public domain]] |
|||
:There are also [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags|many other free licenses to choose from]]. Whichever license you choose is irrevocable, however, so you do want to choose carefully. I recommend the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license. |
|||
:Once we get a good, solid free license on there, you're good to go. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 15:09, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
I tried correcting the photo attribution to free use, but I doubt I used the correct syntax. It's hard enough to write a decent article, but having to learn code as well is burdensome. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ledegraf|Ledegraf]] ([[User talk:Ledegraf|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ledegraf|contribs]]) 22:09, 1 October 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:You don't even have to go that far. Tell me what free license you want to use. I will fix the image description. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:37, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Oh, you did. I fixed it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:41, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Terry Lamb == |
|||
SchuminWeb, even if you are going to delete my photo, thanks (genuinely!) for doing your best to do the right thing by Wikipedia guidelines! [[User:Heywoodg|<font style="background: red" color="white">Heywoodg</font>]] [[User talk:Heywoodg|<font color="blue"><sup><b>talk</b></sup></font>]] 07:18, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Elaine Rapp 2 == |
|||
I don't understand why you keep deleting the photo. As I keep explaining to you, the photo with this article is a FREE USE PHOTO taken by Stanley Rapp, who happens to be my uncle. It is not a copyrighted photo. It is a family photo. Elaine Rapp is my father's sister. Please stop removing the photo. It was mislabeled as non-free use, which must be where the confusion is coming from. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ledegraf|Ledegraf]] ([[User talk:Ledegraf|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ledegraf|contribs]]) 19:17, 1 October 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Read my response above at [[#Elaine Rapp]]. Do what I recommend there. Until you do that, the photo will continue to be removed. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:28, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== HotCat may be acting strangely == |
|||
If or when you have a moment, can you take a look at this [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Jorge_Noceda_Sanchez&action=historysubmit&diff=453413175&oldid=453413118 diff]? As you can see, I edited this article to remove some uncited analysis, and saved my changes. Then, I removed a category using HotCat, which, while removing the category, also reverted my previous edits. I have never seen it do that before, but it is the 2nd time this has happened to me in the last half hour. Should I take this up at the Village Pump, you think? ---<font face="Georgia">'''[[User:RepublicanJacobite|<span style="color:#009900">RepublicanJacobite</span>]]'''<sub>''[[User talk:RepublicanJacobite|<span style="color:#006600">TheFortyFive</span>]]''</sub></font> 19:33, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:That is pretty bizarre. You should definitely report it, most likely to the folks at [[Wikipedia talk:HotCat]]. Since that's the tool's talk page, that's your best bet for getting hold of the developers and maintainers of the tool, and getting a solid answer on it. They will know if it's a new bug, a known bug, or something that is actually normal but the result of an unusual combination of actions. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 19:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::I will do that, thanks! ---<font face="Georgia">'''[[User:RepublicanJacobite|<span style="color:#009900">RepublicanJacobite</span>]]'''<sub>''[[User talk:RepublicanJacobite|<span style="color:#006600">TheFortyFive</span>]]''</sub></font> 19:45, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::<small>([[Wikipedia:Talk page stalker|talk page stalker]])</small> It is probably a caching or edit token issue. I've had the same thing happen to me when using Twinkle to, say, nominate files for deletion. When it adds the discussions to the FFD page, if I was going too fast, it sometimes accidentally overwrites the previous nomination. –[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/Drilnoth|C]]) 20:14, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== As the World Turns == |
|||
[[:Category:As the World Turns characters]] |
|||
Would you mind having a look at the characters in the category, as it seems to me there are a lot of NFCC issues on many of the articles. They just seem to be sprouting more non free images and I believe it's the same uploader. Thanks, [[User:We hope|We hope]] ([[User talk:We hope|talk]]) 15:33, 2 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Could you provide more specific examples? I'll gladly give it a look, but I'm really not inclined to go through all 100-some articles in the category. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 16:14, 2 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:: Here's what I've seen so far: |
|||
::*[[Kim Sullivan Hughes]] |
|||
::*[[Bob Hughes]] |
|||
::*[[Barbara Ryan]] |
|||
::*[[Susan Stewart (As the World Turns)]] |
|||
::*[[Margo Montgomery Hughes]] |
|||
::*[[John Dixon (As the World Turns)]] |
|||
::Switching soaps to Days of Our Lives: |
|||
::*[[Julie Olson Williams]] |
|||
::Thanks again, [[User:We hope|We hope]] ([[User talk:We hope|talk]]) 16:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Another group of articles ripe for some pruning. Someone has definitely loaded up on the non-free content, and it needs to be stripped out a bit, using [[WP:NFCC#8]] as justification. |
|||
:::You can usually get away with one non-free photo in a fictional character article to identify the subject, because how the actor appears in character is not necessarily how the actor appears in real life, and thus it is normally not possible to create free material of a person portraying a fictional character. Exceptions do exist, however, where actors appear in character at public events and such, and in those cases, since there is a free image, no non-free images are acceptable. |
|||
:::So, yeah, I'd say there's some pruning to do. I'd orphan the ones that need to go and then tag them, and if they get challenged, I'd take them to FFD. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 22:35, 2 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Done. If I ever finish my laundry list of free files of non-soap people I'm trying to upload, I might be able to start with the soaps as they send out publicity photos just like the other TV shows. Have gotten a lot of nice free files from pre 1978 publicity photos. [[User:We hope|We hope]] ([[User talk:We hope|talk]]) 23:24, 2 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Oh, excellent! If you are confident that they have definitely lapsed into public domain, by all means, upload them to Commons and put them in to knock out the non-free stuff. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 23:25, 2 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Have been doing this for a while now, but the list of photos I find that qualify keeps getting longer & longer. If you take a look at [[Red Skelton]], there are a ton of photos on the article, but they are all free use. When I upload, I copy both sides of the image as a rule to start so the press release and date are on the record. You can't always find every shot of a performer you need as a free photo, but in the time I've been working at this, have been very pleased with what has turned up that's free use. Trying to put a "dent" in it anyway. ;-) [[User:We hope|We hope]] ([[User talk:We hope|talk]]) 00:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Hang on a mo .... File:Hraday Shah Bundela Of Ajaigarh.JPG - just seconds' warning? Fair use? etc. == |
|||
I only literally just got a notice saying that File:Hraday Shah Bundela Of Ajaigarh.JPG had been listed for deletion - then the message and the file both disappeared within the space of seconds! |
|||
It was uploaded (as it made clear on the discussion page and the upload page) on a fir-use rationale, to illustrate an article about the subject, and after having diligently searched Google for a free-use image and not finding one. |
|||
So, what gives, here? I didn't even get a chance to discuss this! A few of seconds' warning is really not enough to expect to get a reply of any kind - and did I somehow misunderstand the fair-use rationale? I don't think I misunderstood it. It seemed to apply ''perfectly'' to the situation at hand.[[User:ThatPeskyCommoner| <span style="color:#003300; font-family: cursive;">'''Pesky'''</span>]] ([[User talk:ThatPeskyCommoner|<span style="color:#336600;">talk</span>]] …[[Special:Contributions/ThatPeskyCommoner|''stalk!'']]) 04:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:What you saw was this: I nominated the file for FFD, had second thoughts about wasting everyone's time on an FFD discussion where the relevant policy only permits one outcome in cases like this (deletion), and so I reverted my own FFD nomination and just speedied it as an F7. On the actual substance of the image, it is the case where a non-free image of a living person is being used solely to illustrate what the person looks like. Being that this is a clearly prohibited use of non-free content, it made no sense to delay the inevitable and put it through a waiting period, and so it's gone. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::OK, I don't understand that one. Why does the infobox-person template include a space for a picture of the person? If the article is about the person, is it not OK to have their picture in their infobox on a fair-use basis? [[User:ThatPeskyCommoner| <span style="color:#003300; font-family: cursive;">'''Pesky'''</span>]] ([[User talk:ThatPeskyCommoner|<span style="color:#336600;">talk</span>]] …[[Special:Contributions/ThatPeskyCommoner|''stalk!'']]) 04:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::For a living person, it is not acceptable to have a ''non-free'' (that's the key word here) image of a person solely to show what the person looks like. If it's a free image, knock yourself out. But non-free, no. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:49, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::OK, I hear what you're saying - but I can't find anything in the Wikipedia article on fair use (which the upload page links to) which says that. Can you point me to the relevant section, please? [[User:ThatPeskyCommoner| <span style="color:#003300; font-family: cursive;">'''Pesky'''</span>]] ([[User talk:ThatPeskyCommoner|<span style="color:#336600;">talk</span>]] …[[Special:Contributions/ThatPeskyCommoner|''stalk!'']]) 04:52, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::[[WP:NFCC#1]] and [[WP:NFC#UUI]]. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:54, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
{{od}}Okie doke, I can see that. Maybe someone should make it abundantly clear on the upload page that images that fall into those categories are not acceptable, then, or include a section on it in the Fair use article, or something! Seems to me that the only way yer average editor is likely to find this out is by falling foul of it unintentionally! ....... the only 'quibble' I have left is the bit that says "provided that taking a new free picture as a replacement (which is almost always considered possible) ....". I'm not sure how it's likely that I (or other WP editors) could take a photograph of an Indian prince that easily .... (lol!) In any event, I only came across the darned article page on NPP, had to fix a non-working infobox template and replace it with another one, and tried to find an image for the article - can;t think why I feel somehow obliged to "fight their corner" over this! [[User:ThatPeskyCommoner| <span style="color:#003300; font-family: cursive;">'''Pesky'''</span>]] ([[User talk:ThatPeskyCommoner|<span style="color:#336600;">talk</span>]] …[[Special:Contributions/ThatPeskyCommoner|''stalk!'']]) 05:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::I've added the relevant link and short section to the [[Fair use]] article under the "Common misunderstandings" section. This may help the situation. Now someone needs to add it to the upload page ... [[User:ThatPeskyCommoner| <span style="color:#003300; font-family: cursive;">'''Pesky'''</span>]] ([[User talk:ThatPeskyCommoner|<span style="color:#336600;">talk</span>]] …[[Special:Contributions/ThatPeskyCommoner|''stalk!'']]) 05:18, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Clarified Rationale for non-free use of photo for article on Ralph Morse == |
|||
Dear Ben, |
|||
In response to your disputed non-free use rationale for [[:File:Ralph Morse at German Surrender to Allies.jpg]] (photo of Ralph Morse in the article "Ralph Morse" {{Ralph Morse}}), I have filled out and posted the templates non-free media data and non-free media use rationale. Hopefully, I have provided the necessary information in the requisite format to enable this photograph to remain attached to this article. If not, please inform me as to what is amiss so that I can make such corrections and keep this photo in place. |
|||
Thanks, |
|||
[[User:Goloboi|Goloboi]] ([[User talk:Goloboi|talk]]) 05:16, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Goloboi |
|||
== Re: Non-free content criteria == |
|||
I hope you know, not every image I've tried to maintain is strictly for decorative purposes. ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 16:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
: While we're on the subject of images, check your commons talk page. ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 16:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Photo of Ralph Morse attached to article {{Ralph Morse}}: I posted explanation of irreplaceability. [[User:Goloboi|Goloboi]] ([[User talk:Goloboi|talk]]) 10:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Goloboi |
|||
== Drumhead deletions == |
|||
Please respond at [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Railroad drumheads]]. [[User:Mangoe|Mangoe]] ([[User talk:Mangoe|talk]]) 13:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Di-replaceable fair use disputed == |
|||
I just closed [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_September_28#Template:Di-replaceable_fair_use_disputed|this]], can you take care of the necessary updates/cleanup? Let me know if you need me to do something. Thanks! [[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 22:32, 8 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:I just de-transcluded the user talk page usages, which were apparently warnings that missed {{tl|tl}}. The files are all that's left. — [[User:Train2104|Train2104]] ([[User talk:Train2104|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Train2104|contribs]] • [[tools:~soxred93/ec/Train2104|count]]) 22:51, 8 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Will gladly fix the rest and then change the templates to remove it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 00:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Flying Yankee == |
|||
Look, I appreciate zealotry as much as the next man, but it sounds like the [[Flying Yankee]] isn't viewable by the general public. Surely "replaceable" means "a normal person could take a picture of it." [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 01:27, 10 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:The information is so outdated on its current whereabouts (six years!) that one really can't say whether it's still undergoing any work or not. It is perfectly reasonable to think that one can actually get a photo of this locomotive. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 04:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Reasonable but unproven. According to [http://www.flyingyankee.com/history.html this] it's still undergoing renovation. Anyway I've commented on the deletion discussion. [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 11:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Image on Vulcan Iron Works == |
|||
Hi Ben. |
|||
I think you have today removed the image of a [[Vulcan Iron Works]] product from the article, suggesting its use is purely decorative, which perhaps it looks like as it is certainly an attractive picture. I have actually been involved only with a different part of the article (the UK side) which caused me to add a more general lead-in. However, I think that the image directly illustrates the principal product, locomotives, of the Pennsylvania Vulcan Iron Works, which is obviously quite an important part of the article (the founding part, as it happens). The intention of the image is/was to show what the works did, not just to make the article look nice. I see you suggest in your "Please note before messaging me..." that I should just go ahead and revert the change (gulp!). OK then, I'll revert it now - so please accept my apologies for being bold, very happy to discuss. |
|||
"A Vulcan Iron Works print advertisement from Railway Age Magazine, February 5, 1944. |
|||
img URL: http://yardlimit.railfan.net/gallery/zine-verts/vulcan.jpg" |
|||
with best wishes [[User:Chiswick Chap|Chiswick Chap]] ([[User talk:Chiswick Chap|talk]]) 07:40, 10 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Nominated for deletion at FFD. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 08:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Template:Beceni, Buzău == |
|||
Could we relist [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_October_4#Template:Beceni.2C_Buz.C4.83u|this one]] or close it as delete. With only one person arguing to keep it (namely the template's author) and three people arguing to delete it, it seems like a strong case for either delete or a relist. Note that the template's author voted twice. Thanks! [[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 23:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:I really wasn't comfortable making a keep or a delete call on this one, and I felt like it had gone on for long enough and that everything had been said. I would actually recommend letting this one sit for a couple of months, and then if you still feel like deletion is the way to go, then renominate. I really have no opinion about the template either way. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 00:39, 16 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:: Okay, I will take it to DRV (see [[Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_October_16#Template:Beceni.2C_Buz.C4.83u|here]]). Thanks! [[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 18:44, 16 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
==File source problem with File:Thepriceisright.dt price firepol 009.jpg== |
|||
[[File:Copyright-problem.svg|64px|left|alt=|link=]] |
|||
Thank you for uploading '''[[:File:Thepriceisright.dt price firepol 009.jpg]]'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the [[copyright]] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the [[:File:Thepriceisright.dt price firepol 009.jpg|image description page]]. |
|||
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a [[Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion|request for undeletion]] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion --> |
|||
Please refer to the '''[[WP:IUP#Adding images|image use policy]]''' to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user=SchuminWeb}} list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --><br/><br/>From Gh87: <code>The source has become unreliable; it had removed the image from itself since [[Bob Barker]]'s retirement. Therefore, the proof of source must be changed within TWO days prior to deletion! Alternatively, as mentioned previous, the deletion process can be contested at [[WP:REFUND]].</code> --[[User:Gh87|Gh87]] ([[User talk:Gh87|talk]]) 07:09, 17 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Template:Keep local high-risk]] == |
|||
I have reverted part of your recent edits to [[Template:Keep local high-risk]]. Until it is confirmed that bots such as {{user|Fbot}} will honor this template as they do {{tl|Keep local}}, it would be better to keep it. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 11:10, 17 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Please explain what you mean by your posting on my Talk page == |
|||
Earlier today you posted the following on my Talk page: |
|||
[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Please refrain from uploading disruptive images with no encyclopedic value. It is considered [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-upload2 --> [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 11:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
I do not know how to respond to this as I have no idea <u>what image(s)</u> are you talking about that you consider to be "disruptive" and/or having no "encyclopedic value." If you wish to discuss something about which you disagree then please be specific. (If you are talking about [[:File:MEC_Flying_Yankee.jpg]] that is an existing image which I recently cleaned up digitally but did not originally upload. The only image that I ever did upload in which you expressed any interest was the Empire Express 1941 RPO cover which proved to be Public Domain and is now on Commons.) If you are indeed speaking of MEC Flying Yankee.jpg, editorial disagreements over the use of available WP images do ''not'' constitute either disruptive behavior or "vandalism" which is defined as "a deliberate attempt to ''compromise the integrity'' of Wikipedia such as by adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense." I have ''never'' done any of those things nor have I ever engaged in any other form of vandalism on WP. Making such a charge gratuitously (especially for an Administrator) simply because one disagrees with another editor's editorial views seems to me to be a serious violation of good faith as are repeated nominations for deletion of images after previous discussions have been closed in favor of retention. Such actions clearly ''are'' disruptive to the process of achieving consensus. [[User:Centpacrr|Centpacrr]] ([[User talk:Centpacrr|talk]]) 21:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:I am willing to overlook this (fairly blatant) violation of [[WP:NFCC]] on your part because based on your comments in the deletion review, you appear to have no clue about what the non-free content policy says or means. I strongly encourage you to read [[WP:NFCC]] - the whole thing, in detail - before commenting again on non-free content matters. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 01:58, 19 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::With respect, that does not remotely either address or answer my question which was ''"I have no idea what image(s) you are talking about that you consider to be "disruptive" and/or having no "encyclopedic value." If you wish to discuss something about which you disagree then please be <u>specific</u>."'' so I still have no clue what your issue is. If it is the ''"Flying Yankee"'' image (which as I said I did not upload originally, only cleaned up digitally), you have only raised [[WP:NFCC#1]] which I have explained in detail why there is no available free equivalent (including the new ''"Flying Yankee"'' image) that is an adequate substitute for the ''"Flying Yankee"'' at Portland Union Station image in the [[Railroad history of Portland, Maine]] article. The alleged "violation" of [[WP:NFCC#7]], on the other hand, was artificially created by yourself by your unilaterally removing the image from all the articles in which it appeared and then claiming that it is "orphaned." This appears to me to be an approach designed more to get non-free images administratively deleted without having to go through the consensus process. |
|||
::With respect, I really do not appreciate being gratuitously accused of "vandalism" and being "disruptive" simply because I have a different interpretation of "encyclopedic value" and editorial appropriateness then you do. These are ''very'' different things. Perhaps it would be wise for you to reacquaint yourself with the provisions of [[WP:VAN]], [[WP:DE]] and even [[WP:AGF]] as well before making these types of charges quite so casually in the future. [[User:Centpacrr|Centpacrr]] ([[User talk:Centpacrr|talk]]) 02:50, 19 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::I am not going to respond any further on this discussion on this topic, because the points that you are now raising are best brought up in the deletion review related to the Flying Yankee image, the presence of which you already are aware. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 02:53, 19 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::I responded to you directly in here because you posted a non specific and unexplained accusation of vandalism on my talk page. As you now decline to offer any explanation or support for that charge, I will assume that you have withdrawn it and will continue the discussion of the ''"Flying Yankee"'' image in the review discussion section. [[User:Centpacrr|Centpacrr]] ([[User talk:Centpacrr|talk]]) 03:03, 19 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Blissymbols == |
|||
Hi Schumin! I've been working on [[Blissymbols]], and got the main sources detailed, yet I'll continue to study this wonderful Blissymbols, and still may add some good sources. So, the ''refimprove'' note may be soon removed.--[[User:Xabadiar|Xabadiar]] ([[User talk:Xabadiar|talk]]) 08:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Nice! Great work! [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 12:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Re: Drumheads == |
|||
The drumhead for the [[City of Las Vegas]] is way more graphic than the second one in the [[City of San Francisco]]. Unfortunatley, it's the only image available. ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 13:54, 20 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:All you have in the drumheads of the [[Broadway Limited]] are text and lines. That's not exactly graphic to me. ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 13:39, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== doc pages of deleted pages == |
|||
Please make sure you delete the doc pages of deleted templates: [[Template:HK railway station/doc]], [[Template:TA train station/doc]], [[Template:Conflated/doc]], ... and redirects to deleted templates, [[Template:wrapper left]], [[Template:Israel Railways Station]], [[Template:Israel Railways station]], ... I will go through your deletions and check for other ones that you missed. Also, the instructions for closing TFD include tagging the talk page with {{tl|TfD end}} if the template was kept. [[User:Frietjes|Frietjes]] ([[User talk:Frietjes|talk]]) 19:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Thanks for catching that. All now deleted. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 20:17, 20 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== PRR N2sa == |
|||
I've reversed your speedy nomination of [[:File:PRR N2sa.jpg]] on the grounds that the PRR design is distinguishable from the USRA spec, thus whether the one image can "replace" the other is questionable. Best, [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 23:45, 20 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Re:File:FM Opposed Piston Engine print advertisement 4-17-50.jpg == |
|||
While you made a rational argument for using the link as a reference rather than [[:File:FM Opposed Piston Engine print advertisement 4-17-50.jpg]], that particular link is dead, and may or may not have been replaced. These kinds of instances are another reason I've been trying to stop you from deleting fair-use images.----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 05:07, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:[http://web.archive.org/web/20041118044254/http://yardlimit.railfan.net/gallery/zine-verts/fm-op-engine.jpg Archive.org has it]. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 05:10, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Cool. I wish there were an up-to-date link, though. Archive.org doesn't have all websites all the time, you know. ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 12:29, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Montana Central Railway == |
|||
For the article on the [[Montana Central Railway]], current cite #10 (to ''The Official Railway Equipment Register'', p. 137) says that the Montana Central's trains were all marked with "Great Northern" or "Montana Central" on the engines and cars. I've seen exactly one old Montana Central (not the new company, but the original one) engine in my life, but it had the GN logo on it. But you know more than I do about trains: I take the cite to mean that the GN logo and name were on the engines and cars. But you disagree. Why? I'm clueless, so I'd like to learn. - [[User:Tim1965|Tim1965]] ([[User talk:Tim1965|talk]]) 20:27, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:You're actually misunderstanding my edit summary on this one. There is currently no fair use rationale provided for that usage on the file description page. That's the issue. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 21:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::OH! I see what you mean! I'm thick as porridge today. - [[User:Tim1965|Tim1965]] ([[User talk:Tim1965|talk]]) 21:11, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 06:47, 20 December 2012
Redirect to: