User talk:Writ Keeper

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Hello, and welcome to my talk page.

If I post on a talk page please respond there. I'll be watching it for a while. No need to {{talkback}} me unless you think I missed it.
If you start a conversation here, I'll reply here (unless you request otherwise, here or on your talkpage), so please watch this page.

Sorry...

Didn't mean to stomp on your close. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, it's fine, I screwed up the tags somehow anyway. Same same. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

and another request..

Hello again WK. Many thanks for you help with Gianni Mocchetti. I am now trying to create an article for Dynamite Daze but, as you can see, there is a re-direct in place. How do I circumvent/ remove this? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:03, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Martin! Can you not just write the article over the redirect? There's a real edit history behind it, so I don't want to just delete it. If you go to the source of the redirect page, you can delete the #REDIRECT [[whatever]] bit, and it'll be like any other page; you can then just write the article. By the way, if you didn't know, you can force Wikipedia to show you the redirect itself, rather than its target. If you click on the redirected link (like the one in your post here), you'll see little text underneath the target page's title that says "(Redirected from Dynamite Daze)" with a wikilink; if you click on the wikilink in that little text, it'll take you to the redirect, where you can edit the page and modify or remove the redirect as you would for any other page. Redirects are actually just normal pages with a few magic words at the top, after all. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:10, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now done. I probably knew that. Thanks for reminding me. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

why?

why u delete this picture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Socialnetworksguys.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Socialnetworksguys.jpg is a picture with free content. MervinVillarreal (talk) 20:13, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I actually just had your talk page open, and I was about to write you a quick note of explanation. There are two problems: first, I'm not at all convinced that the Facebook person is the actual artist who created the image, as a quick search found it in various other places on the Internet, and that Facebook posting appears to be very recent. If that person is not the original artist, than they have no right to release it under any kind of copyright. Second, even if it is the original artist, saying something is "free content" is not enough for Wikipedia. Our images need to be explicitly released under an acceptable free license; some examples of acceptable licenses are listed here. The point is that we need to explicitly allow others to modify and release their own versions of the image ("derivative works") and to reuse the images, even as part of a commercial enterprise ("commercial reuse"). Neither of these things are implied by claiming it is "free content", as there is a lot of content that is considered "free" that would not allow either or both of those actions. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

then how you know when you are telling the truth or not? the person who uploaded the picture was my cousin, he edit that image, and I dont have to tell lies because, if you find an image equal to this, on other web site, let me know.MervinVillarreal (talk) 20:59, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one. I can't tell when it has been posted, but given that it has 12,000 views, it's probably been quite a while. The source is cited as "web", so it had probably been taken from yet another place on the Internet before then. You say he "edited" it: that's not enough to claim it as his own. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thats my pictureeeeee!, the same name. MervinVillarreal (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no coincidence that was uploaded today, this web site is very famous, so for that have so many visitors.MervinVillarreal (talk) 21:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC) and as no date uploaded, you can not be sure. Also, if someone posts a picture saying free content is free then, right? What does it take? because the options of uploading this[reply]

"This is a free work. That I can Demonstrate it is legally okay for anybody to use, in Wikipedia and elsewhere, for any purpose. "MervinVillarreal (talk) 21:16, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) this is the original AFAIK http://elontirien.deviantart.com/art/Internet-University-Cast-120846620, not a PD image. NtheP (talk) 22:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Nthep. Another person actually showed me that same link, but I wasn't able to look at it at the time. But yeah, if that's the original, and you're not the person who uploaded it to the DeviantArt account, then it's not yours and you can't make the appropriate releases to upload it to Wikipedia. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:54, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

I've been reading your message from the archives on DrMies' talk page. My channel listings wiki hasn't had any support since I started it last October. It would be a lot helpful if I had a lot of help, and if the channel listings deleted off of Wikipedia were brought back. So, thank you. ~~LDE JRuff~~ 12:40, 3 January, 2013 (UTC)

No problem, but I may have been a little hasty. If you're going to reuse the Wikipedia content, you need to do two things: release it under the same license it was released (WP:CC-BY-SA). and provide attribution for where you got it and who wrote it. The license thing is no problem; if memory serves, I think your Wikia site is already licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, so that's fine. I'm not sure how attribution is going work if the content has been deleted, though, since you can't just use a hyperlink to the original. I might be able to dredge up a list of contributors, which I think would cover it, but there are about 4,000 edits to the page, so that might be tricky. Let me ask around and see if there's a third option. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

HV Jain (Jain Bhai)

I've taken the author of that to SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Delhi2010 - there was a lot of stuff to do with this subject a couple of years ago. I can't seem to get a notification to Gzbgzb - I'm having a problem on this machine which is stopping me from clicking the window buttons on the bottom of the screen. Someone's given me a stinking cold for New Year, and I think I'm going to bed... Peridon (talk) 18:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I gave him the template notice. Bed's probably a good idea; wish I could. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Media Maven, Jan. 3, 2013

Hi Writ Keeper!

Thanks again for helping me changing my username yesterday -- much appreciated!

I've created this article and am awaiting review:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/MCT

Can you please take a look at it and tell me what you think?

Thanks for helping me get started!

Best, Media Maven

p.s. can you please reply on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Media_Maven?