User talk:Godfinger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Image copyright problem with Image:Ropartz.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ropartz.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

It's nice to know that there are some Wikipedians out there who see the current image policy as restrictive and ridiculous. I wish there was some way people like us could protest this policy without getting banned from the site by the less open-minded elements of this project. --CJ Marsicano 13:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Lets start a revolution Godfinger 13:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

FA Review of Charles Ives[edit]

Charles Ives has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. MrPrada 08:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


Thanks man- glad to be of help. The sources were already there, which is the hardest part. POV-pushers don't win in the end if we stick with it (: –––Martinphi (Talk Ψ Contribs) 19:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, we have a lot of those it seems. Finding one's self by trying as hard as one can to not find one's self (: –––Martinphi (Talk Ψ Contribs) 22:50, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Near-death experience[edit]

Thanks, I was just doing Recent Changes patrol, and the anon user removed a significant entry that had valid references, so I reverted it. However, you're probably right it should go into the OBE article, would you be so kind to place it there, or would you like me to do so? Thanks again! ArielGold 10:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a go but not just yet as I've got nonWikipedia stuff to do today so if you want to have a go at it then please do so. It's just working out how to best incorporate it smoothly into the article so I'll have a look later and see if it works and suggest any improvements if they are needed but the OBE article is the best place to put it. Yes, there is a difference between NDE's and OBE's although OBE's are a component of the NDE so it could have a passing mention in the NDE article but I think the Science Editor at Times Online is simply confusing the two terms.--Godfinger 10:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I think I'll leave it to you to incorporate it into the OBE article, as I'm not overly familiar with either subjects. No real urgency I'm sure, thanks again! ArielGold 13:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject: Modernist art[edit]

I thought you might be interested in a WikiProject proposal I just created. I would like to start a project devoted to improving Wikipedia pages relating to modern art in various mediums. Many these articles are often simply too under staffed; a specific project focusing on this category of articles will go a long way towards bring them up to Wikipedia standard. I hope you can help! --S.dedalus 00:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The proposal is now called Experimental art. (To clarify that it focuses on all mediums.) --S.dedalus 03:45, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Lalla Ward[edit]

Have managed to get an image of Lalla uploaded on to her page (so far) - I see you've had probs before with this. I agree the image policy seems unduly restrictive but the Yanks are incredibly litigious so bots tend to err on the side of caution, Bolshie Admins likewise. They seem to vary enormously in interpreting Wiki policy. This is "Not Good". As regards the image itself, I agree that one of Romana would be ideal- one of Lalla now would be good enough. I propose emailing Richard Dawkins to see if Lalla will allow me to go to Oxford (which is not far away for me) & take a photo of which I will own the copyright- then I'll upload it, with appropriate licensing. That would solve the problem --Rodhullandemu 23:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

An excellent proposal. Good luck and if you see her tell Lalla I said hello! (She was my favourite Dr Who companion during my teenage years-and my fantasy at the time also!) --Godfinger 11:46, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

August 2009[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to List of Scientologists, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 19:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for adding the entry back with a proper reference. Cirt (talk) 20:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
No problems. I was aware of Twitchell's early involvement with Scientology from my reading and I thought a link to the Twitchell article was sufficient for the article, but evidently not in this case!--Godfinger (talk) 21:33, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Lekeu.jpg[edit]

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Lekeu.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 15:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The photograph is of the composer who died in 1894. There is no information about the photographer given.Assuming the photographer was very young when it was taken (say under 20 years) then if the photographer was alive today then the author of the work probably be over 120 years old, so I reasonably assumed that the author of the work probably died a long time ago, and the work would be in the public domain. I have included the source as requested. I am not sure what else I can do --Godfinger (talk) 17:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Lekeu.jpg missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 04:53, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)