User talk:Gnome (Bot)

If you are here to register a complaint regarding this bot's edits, before doing so please note:

There is a very clear policy regarding the use of fair use images outside of the main article namespace (the actual encyclopedia). This policy is located at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria item #9. We do not permit the use of copyrighted images on portals, userpages, talk pages, or templates.
Even if you uploaded the image yourself, if it is copyrighted by someone else, you do not have the right of displaying it in a gallery on your userpage.
Permission to use on Wikipedia granted by a copyright holder does not grant permission to use outside of the main article namespace. There are two categories of images at Wikipedia; free license and non-free license. If it's non-free, even if used under permission on Wikipedia, it can not be used outside of the main article namespace. For it to be used so, it must be available under a free license.
Read this talk page and its archives before registering your complaint. It is likely someone has already registered a similar complaint, and that complaint will have been given an answer.
Bug reports are very welcome; removing images as this bot is doing per policy is not a bug.

-=[Unsigned comments are subject to editorial deletion by my master.]=-

Therefore, please always sign your message by adding ~~~~ at the end of it .

-=[ Leave a message here ]=-

-=[ Stop me(leave a message) ]=-

My master is Eagle 101 (talk)

Archives /A1

Shadowyze

This is to let you know that the article on Shadowyze has been targeted for deletion and needs support.

Image removal from userspace

I noticed the bot removed an image which it said was in my "userspace". It was actually in User talk:Stevage/archive1. I really don't care about the image or anything, but I don't think a user talk page is the same thing as "userspace". It would be quite reasonable to include a fair use image in a talk page, if you were discussing the image with someone, while trying to decide if it should be included or not, for example. Just something to think about. Stevage 01:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use example.jpg as the replacement image! Pages which contain that image are usually pages which contain editing experiments, so it's the pages which need to be checked for vandalism. If the list of pages using is as long as it is now, it is impossible to find the pages which really need to be checked - before I went into vacation a month ago the list was empty, apparently noone else checked it during my absence :-( Anyway, for pages which really should include an example image, then please use example.png instead of the jpg, it's the same image anyway. As you are a bot anyway - please change all those pages you already modified, doing that manually for those 100+ pages would be a pain. andy 19:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really doubt this bot's image removal is doing more good than harm. To mention one problem that the above two users haven't pointed out already, some (many) of the user pages containing fair use images are also violating other Wikipedia user page policies, and you are making it harder to find them. — The Storm Surfer 02:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All removals are logged here so if you wish to find other violations you are free to do so. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 20:41, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please use your bot ASAP to change those example.jpg's it placed to Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, to make it possible to check the list of pages using example.jpg again. It is no impossible to find the real pages needing attention between the hundred user and user talk pages. andy 18:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After the fact

A polite request, could this bot be split in two, one version to give some warning, and one version to do the changes.

I find it a little insulting that my sandbox was edited on policy grounds but that I wasn't given the opportunity to resolve the problem myself. Really people, we aren't in kindergarten anymore.

perfectblue 06:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, that was originally the way it was structured, and future runs may fit that model, I've done my best to make the bot not screw up anyone's formating (only changing an image name). I found a few things wrong with the waiting pattern, mainly that if the bot said that it would be back in 4 days or so, the user might be offended that he was being *told* to do something. In addition to the sheer size of the task, the second bot may not be around till 8 days later. In any case I don't see a way that this task can be done to make everyone happy. :S —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 06:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At least can you change the image? It's big and red and thus looks like a waring sign. It practically screams "Danger, you have violated policy, the Admin are after you". I think that a white square with simple black text would be better. It certainly would panic novice users less. - perfectblue 07:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll ask the guy that helped to make the image. :) Thanks for your input. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 07:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image fixed. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC) (the person who help make the image for Eagle). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eagle, I've run into similar complaints as the person who started this thread. There's been substantial discussion about it before. The general opinion has been that if a bot were ever to do this work (and now it is) it should do the removal and notify the user, as your bot is doing. There's no sustainable reason why these violations should remain extant pending user's own removal. "No your honor, we did not eliminate the copyright violations because we were being polite and waiting for the user to remove them". That wouldn't fly :) Keep removing, and keep notifying...but keep removing. --Durin 13:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot malfunction

The bot just removed an image link from one of my archives. There's no rules against linking to fair use images, only to displaying them. I think you said something about fixing that earlier, but it obviously isn't working yet. Please investigate. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I see a diff please? —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 18:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, I've found it, consider it fixed. (bot won't run again till it is.) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 18:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have fixed it, now the bot will replace instances of Media:foo with :Image:foo. This will prevent it from showing up in the file links (and perhaps confusing other bots), while still leaving the same functionality. Cheers! —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 19:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot tagged

Hello! The Gnome Bot tagged an image in one of the userboxes on my personal page (Image:Buj-logo.jpg) as being removed as a fair use violation. However, the image is still in the template. I reworked the fair use criteria for the image and provided a source; will this be satisfactory? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The image may not be used on userboxes. It may only be used on actual encyclopedia articles. --Durin 13:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lk:Billy Talent

I have reverted this edit, it was only discussion about and linking to the image. -- Reaper X 17:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats odd, if the image was not being used, the bot should not even had cared if the image was there or not. (Do note I think that image is indeed a replacable fair use image. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 20:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Brian Mar.jpg

Hello Bot and botmaker. on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems/List of Systems Engineering Images page the Image:Brian Mar.jpg was replaced by the Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg because of non-free content policy.

Please tell me which of these policies is violated..??

The thing is that the page is part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems. This project is an initiative to organize, thematize, personalize and actualize these information on Wikipedia around systems and systems engineering. One of my actions is to upload actual images and personal images of notable persons and processes... and these are gathered in that particular list. And further:

The person Brian Mar is listed as notable, see [1]
We are just started and are planning to create a serie of article on systems engineers, see [2], where Brian Mar is one of them.

Please tell me if there are more reasons why we can make a fair use of the Image:Brian Mar.jpg picture in this process? Thank you - Mdd 18:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mdd, the use of fair use images outside of the main article namespace is prohibited per terms of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria item #9. Such images can be linked to outside of actual articles, but they may not be displayed. This is why the image was removed from Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems/List of Systems Engineering Images, and why a number of other images need to be removed as well (the headshots in particular). --Durin 18:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this fast respons. I studied the criteria and it seems I have some things to do:

In the list I replaced the pictures by a listing, so this is solved. Right or wrong?
The other images in that list come from federal governement sources and are copywrite free. I guess they are no problem over there?
I've tried adding to the Image:James Brill.jpg but the picture still shows in the category:Systems engineer. Do you know what goes wrong here? Shouldn't I have put the pictures in a category in the first place?
The Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria item #9 doesn't explicit exclude project pages. Maybe it should?

I'm just learning about using images on fair use bases and I like to learn more. - Mdd 19:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responding point by point: (1) Listing an image is ok. Displaying it is not. (2) U.S. federal government are almost always public domain. (3) Rather than no gallery, just link to the images. Easier. (4) Item #9 excludes anything but the main article namespace, which precludes use in project pages. --Durin 19:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Three point solved. I only don't understand the third point. My question remains: Can I or can't I put the picture in a category? For example Image:James Brill.jpg is now categorised in the category:Systems engineer. Is this allowed or not? - Mdd 19:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. Fair use images may not be displayed in categories. --Durin 19:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I have to remove the term category:Systems engineer out of the image-document? - Mdd 19:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just fix the no gallery tags. I'm not an expert on them ,sorry :( --Durin 19:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The no gallery tag doesn't seem to work. An other thing I don't understand is the existence of the

With the Image:James Brill.jpg I added a section Fair use rationale for use in the article International Council on Systems Engineering. But I can't get ride of these category. Do you know anything about this...?? - Mdd 20:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

return the choo-choo

please return the image of charlie the choo-choo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blu elph44 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Your bot is removing images that are correct and fair use!

I have a copy of an article I wrote, Council of Magickal Arts, at User:BillWSmithJr/Council of Magickal Arts. Your bot just removed the image from my user page copy... the image is a no-profit corporation's logo, used for identification. This is a use SPECIFICALLY allowed on the page your own boilerplate pointed me to! I think you need to re-think what you are trying to do with this bot! --Bill W. Smith, Jr. (talk/contribs) 06:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It says on Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg that replacing [[Image:Foo.jpg]] with [[:Image:Foo.jpg]] will prevent the link to the image from being changed by the bot (although last time I checked that was broken). Tuxide 06:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Thaiflag emblem map by Melanochromis.jpg

I'm removing the tag as this image is currently used by portal:thailand. I think there's an error with your bot as it can not detect uses of images by portals. --Melanochromis 08:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cambodiaflag emblem map by Melanochromis.jpg

I'm also removing the tag of this image as this image is currently fair used by portal:cambodia. Like my comment above, I think there's an error with your bot as it can not detect uses of images by portals. --Melanochromis 08:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the image you are using, it is compiled of different images under different licenses. You can't do that, so once I am off from school, I will help you not only display most images, but make it compliant with Wikipedia policies. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 09:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same applies to the Thai image above you discussed. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 09:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so its clear, the bot does not have a bug, it is configured specifically to remove fair use images in portalspace. I refer you to our non-free image policy, point 9, which statss that fair use may only be used in article space. Sorry :( —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 09:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I have reverted the images (this one and the above too) to tagged versions and removed them from the portal pages. Миша 13 11:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image:Bmw e46 tuning 29 small.jpg

Image:Bmw e46 tuning 29 small.jpg has been removed from my userspace. The racing games userbox which used the same image has also been fixed (replaced with Image:Lamborghini-Murcielago.jpg found in wikimedia commons). Thank you. Sadartha 12:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CanYouFeelTheSilenceCover.gif

Hello, Zanimum. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:CanYouFeelTheSilenceCover.gif) was found at the following location: User:Zanimum/Van Morrison. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 19:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gnomebot, I've deleted the page entirely. -- Zanimum 13:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't edit my userspace

Please don't edit my userspace without letting me know first. Thanks. —JonMoore 15:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The userspace doesn't exactly belong to the users. If it did, they could host whatever copyright violations they please there and noone could do anything about it. But since the bot makes edits in pairs (removal, notification), I believe switching the order (first notify and then remove) would satisfy your conditions, no? Cheers, Миша 13 16:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now changed the bot to notify users first, then remove the image. I don't know why order is important, but its an easy change to make in the bot code. :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 17:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the "userspace doesn't exactly belong to the users", then hosting any fair use image isn't being used to any private purpose, correct? So how's that any different than being hosted in an encyclopedia article? Nagelfar 16:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because userpages are not encyclopedia articles and do not directly contribute to the project. --Durin 17:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to the legal reasoning behind fair use, which depends on the nature of the use, If the user page is using the image for linking to the article, how is that any different than an extention of the article itself? Part of the natural reach of the article's influence. The bot can't know that, but it's a perfectly possible situation. Nagelfar 01:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TURN OFF THIS BOT!

Can someone please turn off this bot, it is making the whole fair use saga worse while the programmer is on holiday! --Dynamo_ace 16:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

If it's working fine, I don't see a reason to shut it off. The fact that some people Don't like what it's doing if not a good enough reason. Миша 13 16:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it is working just fine. The policy is clear; no fair use allowed outside of the main article namespace. The bot is doing a fantastic job. --Durin 16:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm here. Don't worry I don't let it run much when I'm not around to deal with potential bugs. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 17:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images

Hiya, I'm getting a lot of messages at my talkpage about non-free images in my userspace. I understand the intent of the bot, but I think it's getting a bit overzealous in this case. The page in question, User:Elonka/Sandbox, is a temporary page that's being used to edit an article that's going to go back into mainspace. As such, the images are only there in my userspace temporarily. Is there a way that I can tag the page so that your bot ignores it? --El on ka 15:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, there isn't. The way this is supposed to be handled is that while the article is in development in the sandbox, the images should be linked, not displayed. --Durin 16:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, is there any particular reason why the bot doesn't simply convert the images to comment form like Orphanbot does? E.g. it deleted an image on WP:GL where an editor was asking for a replacement of it. Result: nobody could see which image was being discussed. Same situation where an image had been discussed on an article talk page. Changing the images to links wouldn't have destroyed the context. It also appears that the bot doesn't check if the image is shown on the page or not. My sandbox contained a link to an image, since I try to keep track of my uploads, however, the bot erases it even though I had made sure that the image would only be linked to but not displayed. Simply erasing information about the affected images simply causes more work for others. Changing images to comment form (like Orphanbot) or to links would give much less work for others. Valentinian ^{T / C} 19:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typically, the image linking creates layout problems. What image was removed is available in the history. Regardless of the case, the image can't be displayed. As to removing links, not displays, could you provide a diff? That would help diagnose. --Durin 19:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This [3] is the example I had in mind. Valentinian ^{T / C} 20:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes. That particular diff was quite unusual. I and others had no idea that [[Media: was a valid prefix transclusion tag. Unusual. Could you use [[:Image in the future please? The use of [[Media: was so rare I recommended to Eagle to ignore it rather than coding for that use in particular. Thoughts? --Durin 20:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I consider that a bug, and I thought I had that usage fixed, I'll investigate though, consider the bot down until bug is fixed. :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 20:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm actually looking at the diff, that is the correct behavior, it is converting the media link to an image link. There is no change in the functionality other then the fact that when you go on the image page, it won't show up as a file link, but rather will show up in the what links here. This is useful for other bots. If it is preferred I can have the bot not send a message, if that is the only change made to the page on that edit. (Also I am turning the bot back on, there is no error in code, if it turns out that not notifying the user in that case is desirable, I'll code it in :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 20:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, I've converted the link to [[:image form. Valentinian ^{T / C} 20:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unclear as to what the result here was. Is the bot still going to unnecessarily replace images located in talk pages that are only linked? For example, see this edit and this edit. Neither was needed since both images were just linked (As in not visible unless the link was clicked), and the change made by the bot only serves to disrupt both previous discussions. I'd revert both, but I'm not sure that the bot isn't simply going to do the same thing again. MarphyBlack 21:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the images in question. Valentinian ^{T / C} 21:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's become clear since my last message that this issue was not taken care of as a result of the above discussion. These recent three consecutive edits somewhat illustrate that. There is nothing wrong with using the [[Media:image.*]] formatting in talk pages as this is very clearly still within the boundaries of acceptable fair use. The images are being linked, NOT made visible. It's a completely valid use. There's absolutely no reason to change them. I suggest to you, Eagle 101, that you alter your bot to compensate for this as these continued edits are bordering on disruptive activity. MarphyBlack 23:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh crap!, thats a different segment of the code, fixing now (I fixed it for userpages). —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 03:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is now fixed in the running version of the bot, if there are any problems, please let me know :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 03:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also note I've reverted the bot's edits to that page, if it chooses to edit the page again, it will translate media files to :Image: files. The reasoning behind this is that future bots may not be looking for this, and both links provide the exact same result, just one (the media:blah.jpg format) puts the page in the file links portion of an image, while the :image:blah.jpg, does the same thing, but puts the page in the whatlinks here portion of the image page. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 03:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bot block

Any edit by your bot to my user page will be considered vandalism, please prevent it from editing my user page. Jernejl 21:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you do not include fair use images in your userspace, the bot will leave you alone. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care about fair use images, that's not the point, i just don't want any bots editing my user page. Jernejl 09:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage is not yours. Fair use images are not permitted to be on userpages, and the bot appropriately removed them. --Durin 13:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If bot removed the actual free usage images i linked to - i don't care, the only thing that bothers me is the bot editing my user page (please keep robots and skynet away from my user page KTHX). Jernejl 17:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-iterating, your userpage is not yours. Please see Wikipedia:User page for more information on this. The bot work will continue. --Durin 17:59, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The content is mine, or will you tell me copyright is void on wikipedia? also, the bot isn't yours, or is it? can i please get a response of the person who runs the bot? Jernejl 18:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot owner isn't always available. Since I'm knowledgeable on these issues, having done thousands of similar removals myself, I am responding on his behalf. Also, you do not own copyright to your userpage. When you make an edit, such as to this talk page, look at the line two lines above the edit summary box. The last sentence says "You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL". Everytime you make an edit to Wikipedia, you release your edits under that license. You do not hold copyright to your userpage. --Durin 18:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Technically he does hold copyright to his userpage though, if no one else has edited it. Not that it matters since he also released his edits (including to his user page) under the GFDL. Garion96 (talk) 20:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Durin is right that anything you submit here becomes GFDL as is clearly mentioned in each edit window. Your userpage is not yours, perhaps reading WP:OWN would clarify matters. We do not allow fair use images in the user space because it is against copyright laws for us to do so. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All you have to do is remove the fair use images from your usespace per our nonfree content policy. Regards. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 19:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

there are no free use images on my user page, there "was" one, and a bot edited my page because the picture got removed, i just don't like the idea of random bots doing edits to my user page, i don't care about the free use image.

also, last time i checked, even if i submit anything i write here under GFDL, it doesn't mean that i can't use what i wrote here somewhere else under a different copyright license, but my point is, i don't want any bots messing with my user page. this has nothing to do with free use images except this bot. Jernejl 22:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Richard_W.M._Jones

Please restore my userpage Richard W.M. Jones 21:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Over-zealous edit

I understand fair use images not appearing anywhere other than the mainspace, but the bot just reverted a link to a fair use image.[4]

Linking to an image is the correct way of doing this. Please fix. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happened to me too, the problem is the "Media" prefix. I've changed the image's prefix "[[:image" so it should work now. Valentinian ^{T / C} 21:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shiny, thanks. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of user picture

hey man it's fine that you deleted my user picture, but do you know which (if any) pics of Gandalf I can use? It would be a huge help. Kanogul ^(talk) 22:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try this one: Image:Gandalf02.JPG. --Durin 13:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Search and replace problems with non-free image removal

See [5]. The bot found a non-free image in the wrong place and consequently removed it, but it also removed what was straight text, a plain title. This is probably because once an image is identified by What links here, it does a straight search and replace on the page of the text of the image title, rather than only places where the image is actually used. This could be fixed by adding the [[ ]] brackets to the search and replace. Also, it might be a better action to simply uninclude the image while keeping the same title. This will make it so that someone reading the page still gets the meaning and can link to the image, without trawling through what could be a long page history, depending on where the image is. I don't see what is so important about preserving the formatting and dimensions. —Centrx→talk • 00:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can do that, but there are umpteen billion ways to show an image. You can get them in templates, partial templates, with the Image, marker, without the image marker, gallary tags... well you get the idea. Its not a straight foward task. I'll look into what I can possibly do to prevent that though. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 03:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mugen0.png

mugen0.png has been deleted from my userbox for "copyright reasons" although it is neccesarely "free" which I'm a little confused at, Is it bad to put it on my page at all even it is "free"? ~GhostSonic -Talk

I also noticed that another bot changed it to "non-free" game image too, possibly incorrectly ~GhostSonic -Talk

If you own the liscense to that image, and you were the one that uploaded it, you can change the tag to a free license. Please have a look at our page on images. Cheers! —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 03:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Abhay IFV.jpg

The image of Abhay cannot be taken at the moment. It's not accesible to the public, since it is under development. So let the image stay. The image is in public domain released by the MOD (Ministry of Defence) Indian Government. The only problem is that it cannot be used for ~~commercial purposes~~. The Image can be kept with fair use criteria. This applies to all images released by Government of India through their nic.in website. Chanakyathegreat 04:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the images can also be used for commerical purposes. The only restriction here is that it must be reproduced as it is. Modification of the image is not allowed. Chanakyathegreat 07:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg

To whom it may concern,

Hello, I just got your message and I don't understand a word that you are talking about. What image are you referring of? Please be more specific. King Shadeed 00:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to on user talk. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 04:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More excellence

see this edit

Can this bot please be fixed or stopped someday? — The Storm Surfer 05:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot may have some minor teething problems, but the occasional mistaken removal as cited in the second removal in the link above is minor in the grand scheme of things. There are thousands upon thousands of fair use image use violations. I spent more than a year doing these by hand (as have several other people). The net effect is that we were incapable of keeping up with the constant stream of abuses of policy regarding this issue. The bot gives us a tool to combat this problem in a way that makes it possible to keep a lid on the fair use violations. I'm sorry that you were negatively effected, but it's an easy fix on your end. I'm sorry for the inconvenience. --Durin 13:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, the problem was due to the order of the bot's edits. Sorry about that. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 19:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Project 17 frigate.gif and Image:Project 71 Aircraft carrier.gif

Image:Project 17 frigate.gif and Image:Project 71 Aircraft carrier.gif are the computer generated graphics released by Government of India. No alternative is available, nor it can be taken since the construction is going on and it is not complete. Hence till the ships are commissioned, the public domain images can be kept in Wikipedia. Chanakyathegreat 07:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These images are not tagged as public domain. If they are in fact public domain, please provide evidence of this. Without such evidence, we must assume they are copyrighted. --Durin 13:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate removals

Re: Image:Lasolcommercial.jpg, Image:LSmagazine.jpg, Image:Raidcartoon.jpg. These images were inappropriately removed from my userspace. They are my own work, but licensed under fair use due to shared copyright - thus they are allowable in my own userspace. See the fair use rationale on the image description pages. This may be a problem with other shared copyright images too, not only mine. In fact, the bot even removed one of the images that has a dual licence (split between a magazine cover and the photo on the cover) - this should not happen! --Janke | Talk 08:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The images are fair use. Our policy disallows the use of such images outside articles. Hence, the removals were correct. Also, it is my understanding that you cannot "dual-license" like you did on Image:LSmagazine.jpg. GFDL is incompatible because it's a free license, while fair use content is not. The concept of licensing the photo differently than it's content (which is apparently what you're trying to achieve) is also pretty awkward. Миша 13 09:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The policy is incomplete, since it does not take shared copyrights into account. Fair use in this case also applies to my user space, since I am the sole author of the drawings, and I can, by applicable copyright law, present samples of my own work in any medium I wish. I have restored them, but I did remove the magazine cover entirely from my user space, since that image is not entirely created by me (i.e. the cover layout is by the publisher). If you disagree on the shared copyright issue, please take this matter to the arbitration committee, thanks. --Janke | Talk 10:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The policy handles it just fine. Since you can not release full rights to the images, the images must be treated as copyrighted. Thus, they can not be used in the way you desire. I'm sorry. --Durin 13:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia needs the right to use an image for any purpose including commercial or it can only be used under fair use. If you release it to such a license then the problem is solved, I use Creative commons. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"readd" to "re-add"? - suggestion

Hi Gnome (Bot).
You removed a nonfree media image from my userpage, which is just fine. However, your message (italics mine) included "I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image ..." For a moment I thought 'readd' was a typo, and wondered what 'to not read the image to my user page' meant. Then it clicked.
I'm guessing I'm not the only user to be puzzled by this. Perhaps consider changing 'readd' to 're-add' in the message? Could you please pass this on to your master?
Bot on, G(B) --Shirt58 08:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done :) Thanks for the suggestio :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 19:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Book cover scans

I was a bit puzzled by the removal of a scanned book cover. I scanned the book and created the image. Is it against policy to add our own scans of book covers? Thanks Ashley VH 09:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that you scanned it is irrelevant. The author of the book is still the copyright owner. Thus, you cannot release is under a free license. It can only qualify as fair use and can only be used in article space. Миша 13 10:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone stop this bot?

This bot is surely malfunctioning. The copyright owner of two pictures had posted them om Talk:Sutton Hoo and this bot removes the links!--Berig 09:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Owner or not, these images were released under a non-free license. Such media are disallowed outside article namespace (Talk: is a different one). The bot did well; this was not a malfunction. Миша 13 10:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is questionable whether bots should be used where human discernment is a better choice. The copyright owner was very happy that his two images could be posted on WP. I have left him a message and I am positive that he will add the necessary tags in a short while.--Berig 10:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The amount of work that has to be done on the subject of fair use violations disqualifies this as a job for humans to do. A much more reasonable solution is to delegate it to bots and let humans handle exceptional cases and mistakes. What is not appreciated is the hostility towards operators (see the lots of above posts) when the bots merely enforce our policies. Миша 13 10:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you that for some of us who add many pictures to Wikipedia, the bots are very discouraging and even obnoxious when they post a cold message that you have forgotten to add the source, just because the human operator does not take the time to see that you actually did so (in e.g. the edit summary).--Berig 10:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Berig, there are thousands upon thousands of fair use image use violations. I spent more than a year doing these by hand (as have several other people). The net effect is that we were incapable of keeping up with the constant stream of abuses of policy regarding this issue. The bot gives us a tool to combat this problem in a way that makes it possible to keep a lid on the fair use violations. Humans have simply been incapable of keeping up with the workload, despite our best efforts. Misza13 is absolutely correct. I'm sorry this was discouraging to you. There's no intent for this to be the case of course.
Also, please note that permission to use on Wikipedia is insufficient. We have two broad categories of images here; those available under a free license, and those not available under a free license. Permission to use on Wikipedia does not make an image a free license image. You may wish to see this, from Jimbo Wales (who founded this project) regarding permission to use images. It is, simply, a non-factor. Either they are free or they are not. If they are not, they may not be used outside of the main article namespace. If the copyright holder wishes to release rights to the images under a free license, they may do so with such release information being sent to m:OTRS. --Durin 13:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No diret link to relevant policy

I had a couple of images removed from my userspace, and I have no objection to that. On my talk page, the notice I received included "This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy." However, it took some effort to find the relevant policy. I suggest that the quoted text be changed to "This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy." or some equivalent. This may also prevent some of the complaints that otherwise would appear on this talk page. — MSchmahl… 10:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Past Masters Volume One and Two album cover

Why did you delete an album cover which is classified as an album cover? Steelbeard1 11:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

diff please? --Durin 13:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images are under fair use

As Autumn Forrester's partner I am going to jump in here. The pccaemblem image that this bot removed is under fair use. Please see Wikipedia:Logos for my reasons. I am realoading it and this is legal under the concepts of Wikipeia:Logo. The same goes for the sak comedy lab logo. Please reprogram your bot cause it's going crazy based onthe messegas on this talk page. Saksjn 12:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images are permitted only on actual encyclopedia articles. I presume the bot removed a fair use image from a non-article that you have an interest in. This is in keeping with our policies as expressed at WP:FUC item #9. The bot is functioning properly, and there is no need to shut it down. There are a number of people who do not like what it is doing, but that does not change that what it is doing is in keeping with our policies. The problem isn't with the bot, it's with people who do not yet understand policy or understand it but don't want to see it exercised. --Durin 13:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mgm Sam Stern.jpg

Your bot tagged this image because someone altered the tag. Since when is changing a license tag allowed to call an image non-free? - Mgm|^(talk) 13:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This bot did not touch the image. I think perhaps your concerns are with Cydebot [6]? What Cydebot did was proper; {{promophoto}} has been deprecated in favor of {{Non-free promotional}}. --Durin 13:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm certainly worried about Cydebot. I don't go around changing tags I want to see deprecated, but I made a mistake anyway, I thought it was removed from the article when it was removed from userspace. I blame server lag for not showing me in time. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Partidul National Liberal.jpg

I do not understand what is the problem with the image... It is the official logo of a Romanian political party, and the licence tag iscorrect. Image:Partidul National Liberal.jpg ES Vic 16:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria item #9. The image is tagged correctly, but it is copyrighted. This means it can not be used outside of the main article namespace, as you just did with the above comment (I've changed it to a link to the image rather than displaying it). --Durin 16:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery layout

On my userpage you edited this content which was within a Gallery tag:

Image:Red_road.jpg|[[Red Road (film)|Red Road]] film poster

to this:

Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg|[[Red Road (film)|Red Road]] film poster

However the HTML comments broke the layout of the page, preventing the .svg image showing up at all. Removing the comment fixed it. You may want to look at this and see if there is an alternative way you could do this. In fact I'm not sure I see the value of the comment at all, as a quick look at the edit history would reveal the source of the image?

Also I reiterate what a couple earlier respondents have noted about the language used in your comments. Insert links at the relevant parts to the relevant bits, and use plainer English. e.g:

... This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. ... Please don't add the image to your userpage again, and consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain.

--duncan 17:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the bug, I'm working on writing a better message. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 18:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clumsy

"Hello, Huw Powell. An automated process has found and removed an image... The image (Image:Mpc logo.png) was found at the following location: User:Huw Powell/Model Products Corporation. ... User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 06:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)"[reply]

Clumsy. Thanks for the "warning". Luckily I still have the image on my hard drive. This was a sandbox version of an article I am trying to write. Image should stay on WP for the future use. Why not just inform me not to "display" it on my WIP page? I understand what you are trying to do/doing here, but surely a brief advance warning would make sense? Then we could comment out the use in our sandboxes, leaving the fair use image available for when the article goes live. Will I get in trouble when I go to reload it, later? Huw Powell 21:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This bot did not delete the image. This bot does not delete any images. Please see [7]. An administrator deleted the image because it was an unused, fair use image that had been tagged as such for more than seven days. You're welcome to have articles in progress, but fair use images must be in use on live encyclopedia articles to remain on the project. --Durin 21:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe an exception for me?

Thanks for your bot keeping the fair use under control. And thanks for putting up with all the complainers- I think you're doing WP a good service. I just got a note about fair use images on User:Staeckerbot/Suspicious images. Perhaps your bot can ignore that page? The images there are meant to be very temporary, and the galleries are for quick verification that these images are duplicates. As far as policy goes, galleries at CAT:CSD routinely contain fair use images, but they are meant to be very short-lived. I hope that your bot code can accomodate an exception. Staecker 23:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah this is rather unique :S. Its for good purpose, and there is a need to see if there are duplicate images. Very unique situation, so I'll have my bot turn a blind eye to that page :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 02:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks- Staecker 02:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kellergraham Image removals

Please note that the Societe de transport de Montreal doesn't require a license for use of their images. Please refer to this website for more information

But we do have permission to use them commercially or use them outside the context text listed? If not, then we have to call it fair use. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bug

[8]. —METS501 (talk) 01:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. I was modifying the code, and missed out on one letter, that used to be a . Thanks :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 01:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Three problems

Three problems made me block the bot for now. First, see the section directly above this about a bug. Second, there has to be a way to avoid 107 edits to one page, especially all about images located on the same page [9]. Third, blanket find/replace strings (which it looks like the bot is doing) are not acceptable, as the aim is to just replace images. It screws up things like this. Feel free to unblock the bot when everything is sorted out. —METS501 (talk) 02:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Bug one is fixed. (it was already fixed) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 02:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bug 3 is fixed, I'm awaiting suggestions on how to fix number 2 as every bot that I know of stacks the messages. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 02:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All the messages is no problem, but I think 107 edits in a row is a bit excessive. Are you going through Wikipedia page by page, or image by image? If you're going page by page, then just check all the images on one page before posting messages about that page; if you're going image by image, then I guess there's really no convenient solution. Either way, the second one is the least big deal, so you can feel free to resume operations. I've unblocked the bot. —METS501 (talk) 03:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot's activity on my page had only five images to deal with, but even that's interminable and inefficient. See the diff where I shrank the bot's commentary to what the bot should have written (in a single edit) the first time. Wareh 20:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SLU.jpg

Hello Bu b0y2007, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:SLU.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Bu b0y2007. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 18:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I already changed this image. Please see Template:User_SLU... Thanks for reminding me. Bu b0y2007 02:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Saracen_Land_of_the_Infidel.jpg

Never mind, I'm reverting what I had here before. This bot generates, clearly, far more complaint than praise in its mission to correct a potential, maybe somewhat problem in the future over the somewhat obscure and nebulous difference between fair use in user space vs. article space that maybe, someday, one day, maybe in the future some company might complain about a technical, maybe, kind of problem about the difference between user space and article space in fair use law and maybe that person might just potentially file a lawsuit about the, kind of, problem rather than just ask people here to fix it. Do you honestly not have anything better to do with your time? dharmabum 09:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:The end video by birdhouse.jpg

Thanks for the heads up, but your bot is broken as it did not replace the text correctly. Subsequently, I have altered the page to be more meaningful. See User:Ric man/Images gallery.
--ric_man 10:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot edit failed to format link properly

Please see here for an example of broken formatting caused by this edit by the bot. I've since corrected it, but maybe there was a bug? Anyway, congrats on the good work you are doing, and thanks for spotting the problems with the Middle-earth wikiproject images page - we had already put fair-use images ouside the gallery tags as links, and now the only ones remaining inside the gallery tags are those that are properly marked as free, since I've moved the ones your bot found (which were of uncertain or limited use). By the way, I presume you aren't doing this page by page, as I'm going through the Wikipedia:Today's Featured Article archives, and finding only some of the non-free images have been replaced, or maybe you missed them deliberately - what criteria are you using? Carcharoth 11:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah there was :(. Its fixed now though :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 00:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bug?

Perhaps you could take a look at this? The bot replaced the image links only in its own notification. There are still user talk pages linking to Image:Nickelcreek.jpg because it's used in the {{WikiProject Nickel Creek Invite}} template. Jogers (talk) 12:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should be fixed. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 23:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Bot

1. Why did you delete my previous SIGNED comments. 2. Why do you totally ignore some of us. It seems that unless were one of your friends or an admin you delete our posts. Saksjn 12:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot is getting a lot of messages, so archiving is pretty quick. Anyways, we do not delete posts at all unless the page is just getting too big, then someone archives. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:50, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

A brief question about the policy under which this bot works. Isn't there some exemption for articles that are being sandboxed? It seems a little silly that they are being picked up too.

Couldn't there be some kind of sandbox category that entries could be added too in order to give them limited exemptions. I only ask as I've use my user space to sandbox project infoxboxes used by a couple of hundred pages, and their transculusions are being picked up in the sweep.

perfectblue 17:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are sandboxing articles, try using Media:Example.jpg for now. This is a bug that has been reported to the bot owner, but here is what we are getting at. While sandboxing of articles happen, not many people clean out their sandboxes and they linger for time. So, eventually, we will have to go through the sandboxes and clear out the fair use images. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits made to my userpage

I'm really confused. I have a message from you on my talk page indicating that you removed (Image:Policemen and flowers.jpg) from my page User:CzechOut. But I never put that image on my userpage, nor can I find a record in the page history suggesting that this image was ever on my page. Could you please explain in greater detail what happened, since I don't wish to be seen as having violated a policy of Wikipedia. CzechOut 23:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not really your fault. There was a non-free image on the userbox Template:User Czech History which I removed. Since you have that userbox on your userpage, you got the Bot's warning. Garion96 (talk) 00:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never uploaded or used a non-fair-use image! Shut this bot down!

According to this bot, I used a non-fair-use image on my userpage. However, I have never uploaded any images to Wikipedia, nor have included them in my userpage or on any article I have written. I have edited an article with an image that was not fair use, but I wasn't involved in that at all. I edited a different section of the article. This bot is malfunctioning. Please shut down this bot. Ice Ardor 00:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please check your userpage for Twigge/Userbox/SST which had a fair use image in it. Hope that clears things up :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 03:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A request for a slight change

since this bot leaves a message on the talk page, the repeated message in the image box seems unneeded, rather than preserving my layout, it would be more helpful to replace the image with a direct link to it's location, you know Image:Fair-use image... -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 01:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This request cannot be done in all cases, there are multiple ways to put an image in an article. {{image|foo.bar}} (an image put in vie a template) cannot be turned into a link :(. As such it is safer to just swap out the images, with a commented out section saying what the image was. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 04:30, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think people would mind the potential format breaking any more than they would having the page turned into a bunch of weird gray circles. --tjstrf talk 07:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]