User talk:ESkog/Archive17

Index of Talk Page archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1A 1B 1C 1D 1E 1F May 19-December 22, 2010 - December 23, 2010 - November 10, 2011 - December 8, 2011 - October 8, 2012 - October 18, 2012 - May 27, 2013 - May 30, 2013 - March 26, 2014 - January 29, 2015 - March 15, 2017

Wrong user

I'm not the uploader of Image:Harlow.jpg. __meco (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MMSA logo

Hi, you've just marked a recent upload as not having copyright. I have access to the copyright info, but am unaware of how to edit the image page to add the copyright status. Any help would be appreciated. For reference, this is the image: [1] Kilbosh (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am in contact with the association (MMSA) which owns the logo, and they are willing to have it up on wikipedia. Similarly, there was a picture which you've deleted which is also property of MMSA, but which they would like on wikipedia. Please direct as appropriate. Kilbosh (talk) 18:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free Use Lisence help

ES, thanks for the warning. I thought that since the screen shot I took was from a movie trailer, that I was able to use it per the screen shot policy on images. The producer of the film also sent me photos to use, that I assume were the personal property of the subject of the article. Am I in error for uploading as I did? (Sorry, I'm a new user very confused about the image policy.ProsperousOne (talk) 17:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that the copyright holder is wiki-knowledable :(. Is there an easy link I can refer them to with the license policy options? thx!ProsperousOne (talk) 18:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Hi! sorry for those photos ive uploaded from other websites..but im juz wondering why the photo facade of University of San Jose-Recoletos was deleted? i mean there's no copyright problems about that, its my friend's photo, in fact he contributed that image to google earth..he also gave me authority to use that image in public domain..

thanx!

User:Padillo —Preceding comment was added at 16:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanx, im juz gonna inform my friend regarding that matter.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Padillo (talk • contribs) 16:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About Image:logo_sm.png

What do you mean "Non-free content should be low-resolution"? Shouldn't all logos be large so as not to misrepresent the companies? what about in the image policy where it says

Please help ensure that Wikipedia content can be reused widely—including as a source for printed media—by uploading photographic images at high resolution.

? I don't think what you did was entirely right.— Supuhstar * § 19:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ethan Allen Hitchcock

I'm curious why you deleted the picture from this page. I am new to Wikipedia and haven't mastered the ins and outs, but I thought I correctly uploaded and attributed the image (to myself). Please advise. El aguacil (talk) 19:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

copyright issues DriveSentry images

Thanks for pointing out the error, I am a new contributor to Wikipedia and finding there is a bit more to placing an article than I first thought! Mike A Quinn (talk) 17:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kveramani.jpg‎ - Copyright - deletion

Hi,

I found that you have delete Mr Veeramanidaasan's image from his article for the copyright reason. I personally know this image is nothing got to do with Hindu newspaper copyright. This photograph was given by Mr. Veeramanidaasan to that magazine. So, I have added it back to his article. Thank you, Venkata krishnan. V —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ve.krish (talk • contribs) 18:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

information lifted from a book or other non-internet source

Hello,

I've been working on creating the Raymond Alvah Hanson page on Wikipedia. You left this message in the comment section: Notability asserted, but I wonder if this is lifted from a book or some other non-Internet source...

There really isn't much written about Raymond Alvah Hanson that could be used to plagiarize from. The information I have been using to create the page comes from information from Ray Hanson himself as well as other reliable industry sources and documents I have been gathering about the awards he received.I have been working on website content for the College of Engineering at the University of Idaho as well as press releases about the dedication of a site in Palouse, Washington by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers to designate the town where Mr. Hanson invented the self-leveling hillside attachment for combines as a historical agricultural engineering landmark. It was while working on those pieces that I was searching for information about Mr. Hanson online and noticed there was a reference to him but no page with information about his life, and inventions, so I have been adding to the page as I created content for the other projects about Mr. Hanson.

In this sort of situation, what is the best way to represent the information so it does not look plagerized? Also, I have used some of the same sentances in the Wikipedia page that I used in the press releases, and those were then picked up by newspapers. Does that now pose a problem?

Kind Regards,

Leah Andrews —Preceding unsigned comment added by LeahAndrews (talk • contribs) 16:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sean Hannity

I'm guessing from the last note on the article's talk page that you were the admin who blocked the page. If so, wondering if you could please do me a favour. I'm disambiguating links to WFLA. In the radio section of the Sean Hannity article, there's a reference to a contract extension with a number of stations, among them WFLA. If you could please disambiguate the link so that it points directly to WFLA (AM) instead, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks Mlaffs (talk) 23:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not copyright violation

I am employed by the Aurora Inn we own photos being used on the Aurora Inn page. So can't we put them up? Star200 (talk) 12:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

I have emailed the permissions contact you gave me, thank you for your help Star200 (talk) 13:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Broadway In Chicago

How do I determine the correct copyright licensing for the marquee picture in question? Kimberlyhobart (talk) 17:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem

Hi E,

You indicated that I have an Image copyright problem (with Image:Me.1.jpg) on my Wiki pg: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Follis You said, "it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page."

I own the rights and added this copyright tag some weeks ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Me.1.jpg

So please explain in more detail if this is not satisfactory.

Thanks,

John Follis john@follisinc.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfollis (talk • contribs) 03:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of Image:Alex-TonjaWalker-1990.jpg

Hi ESkog. Just a quick FYI: I undeleted Image:Alex-TonjaWalker-1990.jpg. There's nothing wrong with the deletion per se (or at least I trust you judged that). But the history of the image is used as evidence in a current ANI thread (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Cbsite.2C_BetaCommand_and_NFCC._Block_review.2Fblock_request.) so I think it's reasonable to undelete it provisionally to allow non-admins access to the history. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson (talk) 03:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meh... I hear you: I'm already regretting starting the damn thread... Pascal.Tesson (talk) 04:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Image:Remot.jpg

ummm... can you stop deleting the images that I have permission to use? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pikafire69 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that... but you can't leave it for the time it will take for the owner of this image to send the email? Pikafire69 (talk) 04:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mystical Seven emblem

Well, your deletion of the Mystical Seven image has prevented me from uploading anything else with fuller information. Congratulations on your contributions to wikipedia. Very helpful work.OoooooNaaNaNaOoooNana (talk) 04:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ecmsschool.jpg

Image:Esmsschool.jpg

How do I change the copyright on this image? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbie0513 (talk • contribs) 05:14, 16 July 2008

Images

I am aware of the seriousness regarding copyright images on Wikipedia and that is why I have only upload images of pictures which I have taken personally. --Edge o Matic 2005 (talk) 05:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images Are In Danger

every single image I've ever put up is taken by me---esp all images that are loaded up in July 07, pls mass tag all for ABSOLUTE FREE PUBLIC USE, NO Restrictions to anybody, place, or entity. I posted quite a few more than the Pittsb pics listed below

Image:PetersonEventsWINDOW.jpg Image:PetersonEventsBACK.jpg Image:PetersonEventsSTAIRS.jpg Image:PetersonEventsINSIDE.jpg Image:BeeghlyINSIDE.jpg Image:RooneyFieldINSIDE.jpg Image:PNCParkCENTER.jpg Image:PNCParkSCOREBOARD.jpg Image:CivicSEATS.jpg Image:CivicARCH.jpg Image:CivicINSIDE.jpg Image:FitzgeraldOUTSIDE.jpg Image:PalumboCenterINSIDE.jpg Image:PalumboCenterOUTSIDE.jpg

user: greenstrat

7/16/08 6:47pst

Image deletion on biggreenpurse

I am working for Diane MacEachern and she runs her website biggreenpurse.com and gave me verbal permissionto use her image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amandamackay (talk • contribs) 14:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Arthur B.

thank you. --Insider201283 (talk) 21:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image copyright problem with Image:Logo Martifer Const Metal LR.jpg

Hey, how are you? I'm sorry but image "Logo Martifer Const Metal LR.jpg" is linked here: http://www.cmm.pt/htmls/mestrado/Logo%20Martifer%20Const%20Metal%20LR.jpg

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by PedroSeabra (talk • contribs) 23:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tuner image

Hi there, to answer yor query, no not like this one. It's a very clear promotional picture of a rare, specific model. Many will never see an "orchestral tuner", let alone up close to see the buttons that relay all the features that are specifically listed in the article in one unit. This represents the very best of all needle/LCD/LED type tuners. It has features that aren't required on most tuners and retails for around $100 or more. Most will only see $10-$50 devices. As such, this represents a certain type of electronic instrument illustrating the article's discussion. Black Stripe (talk) 17:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC) Having researched this with friends, this is the very best unit to illustrate these features, as no other needle unit is quite as feature comprehensive as this model. I will contiune looking around, and if I find a better example will try to replace it. Black Stripe (talk) 21:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ESkog, I've been looking for other types of tuner that have all these functions, and there doesn't seem to be one! However, the search goes on. As this was a promotional poster I'll look around but no-one I know knows anyone that has this tuner. I'll contine to look. Black Stripe (talk) 10:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I like to think, I hold a type of disclaimer on all the images I upload. Not really, but I say that if an my status as the author of an image, or image's copyright status is questioned, it is to be removed. I do not feel the need to defend my ownership to any images. So yes, removing those images was a good idea, I do agree, but... I'd like to talk about a few of those.

Cengage Learning: I've re uploaded the deleted image Image:CengageLearning Logo.jpg to Image:CengageLearningLogo2008.jpg, with fair use rational, as is proper, please review.

Todd Bentley: When an image is published in a newpaper, i'd say its the other way around! Its highy likely there NOT in public domain! I spent time on assignment in Clearwater &; spent time at the revival, and can provide contact information for Mr. Townsend. Mr. Townsend can be contacted here, for more information.

As for the picture of Brian Wardwell, I'm troubled. I took the image, and not only did I take it, I contacted the owner of the website about posting it! But. As per my disclaimer, I can't PROVE it. I'd like to re-upload it as-is, without any license change. I could also provide a few images not posted anywhere else if that is needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micov (talk • contribs) 23:16, 18 July 2008

Hannity

I reverted User:Docku adding the same material back into the article. It still has no consensus. I believe I'm following the BLP guidelines in removing controversial material that is poorly sourced, however, I don't the headache for a while so am taking an enforced wikibreak. --PTR (talk) 19:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained in the talk page why I have inserted the edit back to the article. We have more neutral editors in support of the insertion. While I know Polling is not a substitute for consensus, I suggested PTR for compromise. He didnt even respond thus I had to insert it back. Now he has just reverted again without giving proper explanations. I am not going to be involved in edit warring, I would rather recommend PTR revert it himself as his actions are suitable to be called disruptive as per WP:DISRUPT guidelines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docku (talk • contribs) 20:45, 20 July 2008

I have restored the edits based on an explanation I have made in the talk page. This is a decision I made after following the dispute resolution procedures which included Reliable source notice board , RFC and BLP notice boards and more positive opinions from those procedure. I am confident I havent broken any wikipedia policies. Thanks. Docku (talk) 17:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Arzel has reverted my edits again. In fact, that was a compromised edit edited by one of the persons who opposed the inclusion of the controversy. By reverting the compromised edit, he has proven himself to be disruptive. Apparently, he is the only one who is adamant about reverting. There is also a new source which confirms the controversy. Docku (talk) 22:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copy right issues with Pics uploaded in the article: Karachi Zoological Gardens

I've visited that place yesterday, (Sunday 20 July, 2008)and taken these pics with my camera cellphone. I am not sure that how this has violated any copyright issues?

Nomi887 (talk) 08:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images in Karachi Zoological Gardens

Sorry for misunderstanding, appropriate tags have been added to these pics.

Nomi887 (talk) 04:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect picture deletion

You have improperly deleted the photo "Image:TodayShow SaraYvonne.JPG" citing a blatant copyright violation as a TV screenshot. I took this picture in studio at the Today Show and would appreciate it if you would not callously vandalize images and pages without future consideration. Mdutilepr (talk) 18:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]