User talk:J Milburn

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

Thanks for dropping by! Please leave new messages at the bottom of the page. Messages here will often be read by a number of people. If you would rather discuss an issue privately, you can email me. I typically reply here, and, if I do, I will typically tag you in the message. If I haven't gotten back to you in a week and/or haven't gotten to something I said would, feel free to leave a reminder.

No offense taken

I'm someone with super tough skin. Really, no offense taken. And to be honest, I fully agree that the Temple image has terrible technical standard.

Off topic, if I wanted to help contribute information to an article that came from a non-electronic medium (a book), then is there a Wikipedia page that gives directions to how I would cite it? Gut Monk (talk) 16:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me. I'm getting off the Facebook sugar buzz where everyone knows what I did because IT BROADCASTS IT TO THEM!!

I don't find you unpleasant. You are exact, like me. It is cruel to some, but meh, so is the learning process.

I'm seeking the copyrights to two Temple Grandin pictures. Really, I'm as far from discouraged as is possible.

P.S. Wish me luck. The photographer did really well on this next one, and I'm really hoping that I smoozed him enough to release a copyright to Wikipedia. Gut Monk (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.wilson.edu/wilson/uploadedimages/student_life/commencement/TempleGrandid.JPG

Better lucky than good.

I, at the beginning, advertised the CC by SA 3.0 license to the originator. I'll have you on email curtsy copy (CC) if he wants to deal. (I really hope he wants to.) Gut Monk (talk) 00:50, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files

PDiv Looks Back.jpg & Sir De Villiers Graaff.jpg

Okay, help me out here please. I have been trying to upload this picture for some time now and every time it has been taken down due to some uncertainty about some copy right issue or another. Since this is the front cover of a published book I know that I am with in my rights, under fair use agreements, to upload this picture. Since this is a very rare book I also know that it is highly unlikely that there are ANY alternative sources or subsitutes for this picture.

What should I do?

You could upload the image under a non-free use rationale- however, its use in the biography as currently stands would not be appropriate within our non-free content guidelines. The book cover is copyrighted, uploading it claimed as your own work is highly inappropriate. J Milburn (talk) 10:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, as is the case with the other image I previously tried uploading it under an alternate domain type, not very familiar with what domain type this picture should be have been categorized under and did not fully understand the reason for its last deletion. In this case I was just at my wits end as to why it was being deleted. I now understand.--Discott (talk) 10:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete this picture(Div Looks Back), I would do it my self but I am not familiar with the process of deleting images. Thanks--Discott (talk) 14:17, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Div Hottentots Victory.jpg

This is a picture taken from a newspaper publication in 1948 that is now in the public domain. It is already put-up, with out any problems I might add, on the Afrikaans version of the the wiki entry for the De Villiers Graaff entry. How can I keep this picture up? What more information is needed or under what category should it be saved under?

Why is it in the public domain? If it is in the public domain, it should be uploaded as such with an explanation of why, not uploaded as your own work. J Milburn (talk) 10:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I previously tried uploading it under an alternate domain type, not very familar with what domain type an old newspaper picture should be categorized under so that might be why it was deleted in that case. Frustration and/or the possibility that this is the correct categorization caused me to save it in this form.--Discott (talk) 10:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You stated that it is in the public domain- why do you believe that? If it is public domain, it's welcome to be uploaded, but you're going to have to explain why it is. J Milburn (talk) 10:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A) It is listed as such in the Afrikaans version. I suppose I should have refered to that when uploading it but I am very familiar with the protocols when it comes to using an image from the same site, different language. [[1]]

B) It is from a very old newspaper article, 52 years ago.

C) The original version of this picture is in my possession but, because I am in China(and have been for the past 3 years) and not back home in South Africa, I do not have access to it and so can not upload it.

--Discott (talk) 10:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a little research, and found this. It would appear that the image is in the public domain in South Africa. J Milburn (talk) 10:43, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Will the image remain up, will I have to added that tag to the image my self (if so how so)?--Discott (talk) 10:56, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please check this image again to see if the licensing information that I have changed is not correctly done. Thanks,--Discott (talk) 11:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a couple of fixes, and removed the deletion notice. J Milburn (talk) 11:24, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Colony of Natal flag.png

I do not understand; this is a picture of a flag of historical geographic region that I made my self in the same way that the other version of this ensign was made. The only difference being its dimensions and the save file type. It would be greatly appreciated if you could give me more information on why its a "Possibly unfree File"?

Do you own the copyright to the flag? If not, why are you uploading it claiming that you do? J Milburn (talk) 10:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now, I categorized it wrong. Thanks for pointing this out.--Discott (talk) 10:42, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question, I see that which is already uploaded Flag of South Africa (1912-1928).pngis no different from the one I uploaded Flag of South Africa (1912-1928).png and does not appear to be any differently categorized. Why is my one disputed and the other one not? The same can be said of the other ensign images I uploaded.--Discott (talk) 10:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a problem with other images, you are welcome to nominate them for deletion as well. That image certainly shouldn't be released like that- I have been involved in issues concerning flags on Commons before. I will look into that image in particular. However, the fact that other images are uploaded under questionable licensing doesn't mean that you can upload your images wrongly. J Milburn (talk) 10:56, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, however if these images are take down and/or their creators contacted about that, then please do inform them of how they can go about uploading them in the correct way so as to encourage them to do so. As these flags are an important part of wikipedia project South Africa and it would be a tremendous shame to loose them over some thing like improper categorization. On that same, how should I go about reclassifying the current ensigns I have up so that they do meet current guidelines, assuming I can of course. Will I have to completely re-upload them again?--Discott (talk) 11:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, you'll just have to edit the image page to give accurate sourcing, author information and copyright, as well as the correct date and a description. J Milburn (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. I will do that soon. I do have one more question on this topic though. Under what sort of copyright should a now defunct flag from history be under?--Discott (talk) 11:17, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some flags will be in the public domain, some will be under copyright. It depends on the law of the nation in question. J Milburn (talk) 11:25, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--Discott (talk) 10:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for your help with Saudahmed66's blatant disregard to image copyright/policy. I feel you have earnt this cookie!

Acather96 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Acather96 (talk) 11:28, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

for your comments on my page on Barend van Niekerk . To take your points in turn:

(a) The description "a brilliant jurist" is not a non-neutral, subjective evaluation; it is objectively sustainable from van Niekerk's academic career and the judgments of distinguished peers. Newton was a brilliant scientist; Einstein a brilliant mathematician. It is therefore to be distinguished from subjective evaluations such as "The reviewer was a self-important arse."

(b) the word "proving" here is quite clearly used in the sense of "testing" (from the Latin probare), not in the sense of establishing as a matter of fact; c.f the phrase "the exception that proves the rule". The reference is therefore objective and neutral.

(c) Your note regarding BvN's action in painting the Old Station roof, the language of his daughters etc. is your only point that is at all justified. However, biographic content necessarily contains biographic material.

(d) for you to suggest that the above references are "completely inappropriate" is exaggerated, discourteous and incorrect. Jonpost1 (talk) 12:43, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dakota pic

Thanks for uploading the pic. I think it would be a nice addition lower on the page, but not in the infobox. BTW, I thought we weren't supposed to place images in article talk pages, but you probably know more about that than I do. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 16:45, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind the image on the talk page. I was just wondering about the policy. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 16:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mega Drive Article

All my work on the Mega Drive article is based off of the Super NES article, which is a featured article. [2] In this article they have a shot of Super Mario World, a Super NES emulator, and a SNES demonstration of Mode 7. Mode 7 is a capability added by the Sega CD, and if I need to add a sourced statement about that to the article, I am more than prepared to do so.--SexyKick 11:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks. I'll probably add an image of Gens with no game loaded tonight. I'm pretty tired, and intend on watching the EVO World Finals today, so I should catch a nap. Will the template on the Sonic CD image and Mega Drive article be removed for now then?--SexyKick 14:21, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet, it's been a pleasure working with you. I genuinely appreciate what you have helped me to learn about non-free image policy, and software licensing, etc.--SexyKick 14:24, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Awarding you a barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		For helping me to automate a tiresome task using AWB. Richard Cavell (talk) 12:33, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Confrontation Beast-Fist Akugata.jpg

This image has a fair use rationale. It merely does not have one in a templated format.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 16:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a fair use rationale, it's a series of statements. If you are keen to keep the image in the article (and it look that there may be a valid claim) please write a strong rationale. J Milburn (talk) 16:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is so a fair use rationale. It mentions the copyright holders, how the image is being used, where the image comes from, how the image is not replaceable, how the image is one frame, etc. This is all of the shit that you find in the template but in sentence format. It was valid from before the template was made, valid when the template was made, and should still be valid.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 16:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually, it doesn't. Why isn't it replaceable? What's it showing? Why does that need to be shown? Just clean up the rationale, stop being a dick. J Milburn (talk) 16:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PING

Hi, I've emailed you about the F and A page at The Signpost. Tony (talk) 09:02, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. We'd like to ask a different user each week (I guess rotating around the regulars); there weren't many pics promoted this week, but your choice, and why, would be nice in just a few sentences. Be technical if you wish, or not. Sorry to be so late: the next edition will be published within 24 hours, I guess. You can email your comments to me, or print them here. Tony (talk) 09:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hey there J Milburn. (I'm not sure if I should wait until this competition is over or not so I'll just directly ask you since you are the most active of the three judges) With the unfortunate retirement of IMatthew, you are the last "very active" WikiCup judge (true there is Fox and Ed but I've yet to really see any major contributions by them in terms running the competition, no disrespect to either of them intended). I was wondering, I'll likely not partake in next year's competition for personal reasons as I simply will not have the time to write at such a fast pace as I currently am (To be honest, I'll likely be eliminated this round for those very reasons). However I have every intention to continue my assistance in the behind the scenes work that I've been doing for the past few months. As a result, I'm interested in becoming the fourth judge for next year's WikiCup. I'd be more than happy to help you out in making the pools, the poster, updating the contestant's page and of course attending to the many issues brought up at the talk page. I know that this may be a little early to be asking such things but I'm just asking for your opinion on the matter. Would you be OK with having me helping you out next year as a judge instead of a contestant? Thanks,--White Shadows ^{I ran away from you} 02:53, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Of course you three will have to discuss as this cup comes to an end.--White Shadows ^{I ran away from you} 14:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regine Velasquez

Hi J Milburn, why do you deleted my photos that I'd uploaded in Regine Velasquez article, they're authentic and captured only by myself using some of my cameras, and about the photo that you'd delete with the name of photographer so what the people who captured the photo that you're pointing is my brother so whats wrong with that if i am using my brother's work??? This question to you and complains may be rough but I'm just only asking why those things are happened, and please guide me how to upload photos in a right way thank you and god bless.Russart 1999 ^{I'm Asking Something} 05:53, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can I trouble you for a second opinion?

Hi. There's an image copyright question at my page, and since it deals with a featured article candidate, I would especially appreciate another set of eyes. It's at User talk:Moonriddengirl#Need you to look at an image. If you don't have time, no worries; just let me know, and I'll track down somebody else. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:02, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me as well. Courcelles (talk) 17:22, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free images

I have addressed the problems for the two images you mentioned on my talk page. Please review the changes I have made and let me know if there's anything more I need to address in order to properly and adequately rationalize their use:

File:Phantom1987.jpg File:Phantom_revolution_ad.jpg

If there's nothing else I need to do please let me know and remove them from the list of disputed non-free images/media and ensure that they are not mistakenly deleted.

Pmicka (talk) 21:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What else could I do to make them better? I understand that they may not be "perfect" but if the criteria for deletion is based on any one person's notion of "perfect" rationale that just makes me uneasy. In a perfect case, what else would I need to provide to leave no room for human judgement of my rationale? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmicka (talk)

Thanks! Pmicka (talk) 21:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at Smartse's talk page.
Message added 11:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at Costasxo's talk page.
Message added 116:33, 14 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

List of films about the RMS Titanic

Hello. Can you please explain me why did you removed images from here, as i think that it is under Fair use here. Just in order to explain what movie is about. This image is used under same conclusion here. There must be Fair use rationales for usage there, as it is just a list. --Tadija^speaks 11:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spiral_Jetty_USU.jpg

Hello! Sorry to be such a nuisance with my uploaded photo. In answer to your questions, Dr. Fox is the director of the Honors Program at Utah State. She provided the picture to me for upload to Wikipedia. She, as the program director, took the picture at a school-sponsored function, which means (as it was explained to me) that the Honors Program is the sole owner of the rights of the picture. I selected Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 because it seemed like the license that was most appropriate. If I messed up, or if you have any other questions, let me know. I apologize again for being a burden. Hydrobrain (talk) 19:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrating Wikipedia

You wrote:

We do not use a non-free image until we are absolutely certain there is no possibility of a free image. There are plenty of pictures of this person on the Internet, and I'm sure, with a little effort, there's a good chance of finding a free one or having one released. With the current attention the article is getting, there is a higher liklihood of a free image being added- I've seen it happen many times. You're a decent long-time editor, so I'm not going to patronise you, but I can assure you that our non-free content policies are more conservative than you seem to believe.

Who is this "we"? You must mean the people who do not understand copyright law and are diminishing the experience of Wikipedia readers for no good reason. You know very well that by deleting the image from the article, you doom it to the "orphaned image" pile where it will be deleted, and thus you destroy something good and useful. This makes me very sad! Please show me a WP policy that says that "we" cannot use a fair use image until a free image is made available? I think it is absolutely wrong to remove an image from an article simply because you think there must be a free one somewhere in the world. If you are willing to request permission, that's great, but you should not try to force other editors to do it by removing images. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "we" are Wikipedia editors. I do not pretend to know anything about copyright law- instead, I know about our non-free content guidelines. I do indeed know that, in removing it from the article, I allow the image to be deleted- and rightly so. Our non-free content criteria are quite clear that non-free images cannot be used until we are certain a free image is not possible, and so yes, I very much should "force" this upon other editors. J Milburn (talk) 21:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You seem determined to delete images from this encyclopedia, but you don't seem to know or understand why you are doing it. There is no policy that says that " non-free images cannot be used until we are certain a free image is not possible". It says, rather, that non-free images can be used "where no free equivalent is available". So, until you find one, or make one available, they can be used. Until a free image becomes available, it is destructive to discard these images. I hope you will rethink this, because what you did in this instance is bad for the project. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you destroying images? It appears that you don't really know. I don't think you can defend deleting fair-use images from articles that have no illustrations at all. It makes no sense, and it is not what the policy requires: because it is the wrong thing to do. Frankly, I don't see any point in discussing this further, unless you have a new point to make. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tramp image

Edit uploaded. If you're interested in how I work, read the retouched template. It reveals a technique which works well for that kind of image where the colours are obviously wrong. It doesn't work on colour images, of course, but if a colour image was as off as that one was, you should probably just give up =) Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message regarding HLWiki

HLWiki Canada was my first real article I created, so I am very much a newbie. I have added a link to academic citations in the hopes that it will meet the criteria for inclusion. I have also added a licence to the logo and made the name change, as per the suggestions of the community page. Since I am still learning, some of the technical difficulties have been hard to manage but thank you for your comments and any suggestions that you may have for improvement would be much appreciated.

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