User talk:Mahagaja/Archive 23

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mahagaja. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

→

It's hip to be square!

Well, "the standard in the literature" shows that IPA is perhaps not as scientific as I thought it was. i and u are always used in Sesotho, though an i and u with a circumflex are used when talking about Ur-Bantu (it has both close and superclose vowels).

Note how both the vowel in "boot" and French "deux" (I think) are given the same symbol when the French is clearly higher than the English.

I need to distinguish between them because in some rare cases the half-close vowels "look" and "lick" become raised to positions more akin to English "seat" and "suit" but not superclose. It's the reason why Maloti is often written "Maluti" (if the vowel was really u then the name would be pronounced "Maduti").

Am I safe if I just use slashes for single phonemes and square brackets for longer sequences? Would eg the class 8 plural prefix "di-" be both /di/ and [ li ]?

Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 14:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I mean /li/ and [di]. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 15:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, the IPA isn't unscientific, but it doesn't make unnecessary distinctions. The English vowel in boot is the highest, backest vowel English has, so it's transcribed [u]. The French vowel in doux (not deux) is the highest, backest vowel French has, so it's transcribed [u]. If you're sticking to one language at a time, that's all that's necessary. But the IPA does provide diacritics that allow you to make finer distinctions: if you want to compare the English vowel with the French one, you can transcribe the French vowel as [u] and the English one as [u̞].

For Sotho, I'd transcribe the half-close vowels as /ɪ ʊ/ and their raised allophones as [ɪ̝ ʊ̝]. —An gr 16:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, another problem I have is that I can't see those funny symbols in Opera Mini. I'll assume the half close vowels look like strike throughed i and u (i and u); please describe what the allophones look like (they seem to consist of two symbols each).

On an unrelated note, the example text given at the end of the article (from Senkatana) is from a copyrighted book. Does this mean I should remove it? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 16:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

To your first question, no; they're the IPA symbols for half-close vowels with the "raising diacritic" beneath. The sentence I wrote above should look like this:

To your second question, yes, you should probably remove it, especially if there are texts you could use that are in the public domain. —An gr 20:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to be such bother (don't be angry!) but I can't see that image on my phone as it's too wide (and ends up 3 pixels tall)! Could you possibly make a high resolution square-ish image of just the 2 symbols?

I'll think I'll just get rid of the copyrighted text, Senkatana is a bad story anyway... Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 22:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

How's this:

? In Unicode that's U+026A plus U+31D for the first one and U+28A plus U+31D for the second one. For the ordinary half-close vowels just use

(U+026A; the Near-close near-front unrounded vowel) and

(U+28A; the Near-close near-back vowel) alone. —An gr 05:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow! That's perfect!

Okay, so I was thinking of using those two symbols for the half close vowels (since that's what my Oxford English dictionary uses) but EVERYBODY ELSE uses iu (0268 and 0289 ish).

Are these two different vowel sets!? I don't think it's a good idea to change the entire article to use a symbol not usually associated with Sesotho. Your thoughts?

Thanks a lot for your patience - this has been very helpful. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 09:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

If i and u are standard in the literature, I'd still use the official IPA symbols (so as not to confuse people unfamiliar with the standard literature, since i and u have completely different meanings in IPA, see close central unrounded vowel and close central rounded vowel), but leave a note explaining that I↑ and U↑ are conventionally transcribed i and u in the literature. —An gr 10:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a rather large decision to take, but I shall do it. That's just one of the benefits of taking on such a great responsibility.

Thank you so very very much for your help. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 18:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Lombard language

Blame this on the fact that you were the last person to edit the article but can you read and write the language? Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

No, I can't. -An gr 20:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Virginia Hey

Why was this image deleted? The use was allowed. Charleenmerced ^Talk 17:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

No, Wikipedia policy does not allow fair use images of living people in most circumstances. See fair use criterion 1 and counterexample 8. —An gr 17:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but she herself specified in her website that the pictures were free to use. " WALLPAPER - FREE

If you would like a free wallpaper for your computer, (no strings, there are some fab pics of my character Zhaan and brand new ones of me on this page:" and then provides a link Charleenmerced ^Talk 19:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Please see gratis vs. libre. She may intend the images to be "free as in beer", but that doesn't make them "free as in speech". —An gr 20:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

User no fair use

I migrated the userbox into your namespace. However, I accidently created a talkpage for it at User talk:Angr/User no fair use. If the talkpage is still there by the time you get this message, please delete it. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 18:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Cyrillic Projector image

The confirmation of the license was emailed to Wikimedia, and confirmed by Bastique (talk · contribs) (bureaucrat at Wikimedia Commons), who edited the image file here on EN.[1] If you'd like some other confirmation here though, please let me know what's needed, thanks. --El on ka 21:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Van Morrison free use image replacement

The current photo is so descriptive of what kind of musician Van Morrison is, I wonder what you are replacing it with and why. This photo is the most important of all in the article. I would know whether to object if I knew more about why and with what. Hope you'll reply. Thanks, Agadant 14:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

At the moment I'm not planning to replace it with anything. Wikipedia policy is that fair use images of living people may not be used if they could be replaced by fair equivalents, even if those fair equivalents have not yet been found or made. —An gr 14:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

But why? We've been working on the article to get it up to GA or FA . The photo may be out of date but it's so descriptive of who he was in his "heyday" -Astral Weeks, etc. that I wonder if it can be replaced especially since he is so publicity shy. What if nobody has anything, how is this going to improve the article, or get the rating for it upgraded? Thanks, Agadant 15:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Being out of date has nothing to do with it. Please read counterexample 8 of Wikipedia's fair use policy, which derives from fair use criterion 1. And you're certainly not going to get GA or FA status with an image that violates policy. —An gr 16:35, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Afd

Can I ask you to step in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aasulv Olsen Bryggesaa. I've been trying soooo hard not to bite the newbie. Maybe I failed. Anyway, his newborn wikilawyering is sending up my stress levels, so I'm going to stop discussing. Happy for you to disagree with me there, by the way. Just wanted an admin to chime in on policy/guidelines. Thanks, --Dweller 16:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Being an admin doesn't give me more authority, and in this case I really don't care if the article is kept or deleted. —An gr 18:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Marcus Allen pic dispute

Greetings,

The Marcus Allen magazine photo I downloaded came from this website:

http://imageevent.com/caediii/marcusallen?n=0&z=9&c=4&x=1&m=20&w=0&p=20

Which I highly doubt holds the original copyright...the original holder would be:

http://www.freshmen.com/

I realize that under "NORMAL" situations, images like these are not "fair use." However, might I ask: how many Freshmen Magazine cover boys have been charged with murder? ONE, "Marcus Allen" or Timothy J. Boham. Second, Marcus Allen's porn career was meteoric, going from a virtual unknown to fairly-well known virtually overnight. Being voted "Freshman of the Year" was pivotal. Thus, this image was pivotal to show his early-career success. Other photos don't. Showing a picture of him later, when he was on the downside of a career, is hardly what is needed to 'flesh out' the biography.

Ultimately, this is a tale of an ordinary guy skyrocketing to early heights, soon running into problems/disputes and not able to handle it, and not able to deal with the 'downside' of a crashed career. This is not much different than a Lisa Nowak story, who after training for 10 years to make one space run, was now not likely to ever go back up again.

Certainly in the Boham case, he shares blame but at the same time, its a sad story that someone can go from success to failure so quick.→ R Young {^yakł_talk} 20:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Please read what {{magazine cover}} says. "It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of magazine covers to illustrate the publication of the issue of the magazine in question ... qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement." In other words, it's not fair use to use the image to show a point in a person's career. The magazine cover has nothing whatever to do with the murder charge, or with a meteoric rise followed by a, well, meteoroidal fall. —An gr 06:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Aninconvenienttruth.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Aninconvenienttruth.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

CSD I1

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:Image:Aninconvenienttruth.jpg|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Berserkerz Crit 13:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Someone uploaded a higher res at Image:Poster of inconvenient truth.jpg. Berserkerz Crit 13:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

That clears things up. Good work! Berserkerz Crit 13:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Images

I disagree with your decision to delete a pair of images of vintage station wagons, a 1972 Cutsom Cruiser and a 1969 Galaxie Squire. Have you ever tried to find a station wagon of that age? It's nearly impossible. Station wagons get beat to death and junked, and the ones that survive usually end up in demolition derbies. The Galaxie image was noted by another editor in the articles it was in as being a factory prototype, therefore, it is entirely unreplaceable because the car no longer exists. --Sable232 17:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Were the images being used for critical commentary, as required by fair use policy, or were they only being used to show what the cars look like? —An gr 05:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I think so. Design features of the pictured cars were discussed in the text, and after reading WP:FU again I still think they qualify. --Sable232 15:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Give me the image names and I'll undelete them. —An gr 18:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:1969_ford_galaxie_squire.jpg and Image:1972_Custom_Cruiser.jpg. Thanks! --Sable232 18:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Dave Winer

I notice that you removed a deleted image from the article Dave Winer. Is it just one of multiple images you just deleted, and if so why did you delete it? To clarify--was there a problem with fair use, which could be resolved by uploading a different photo, or was there some other kind of problem with this image? betsythedevine 22:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I deleted about 200 images yesterday, so forgive me if I don't remember this specific one. In all likelihood it was an image of a living person that was being used under a fair use claim, or that had been uploaded using the "fair use image of a living person" tag from the dropdown menu, which automatically tags the image for deletion. Wikipedia policy is that fair-use images of living people are allowed only in very restricted circumstances. I see you've uploaded a free image for the article now, so that's okay. —An gr 05:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation! For others who, like me, are puzzled by the sudden disappearance of images from articles they work on, here's the policy behind it--that "Copyrighted images that reasonably can be replaced by free/libre images are not suitable for Wikipedia." betsythedevine 16:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Colossal Conection picture deleted

I've seen you delete a rash of wrestling images and I can't do much about some of them - but could you please tell me how in the world I am supposed to find a "free alternative" of the Colossal Connection when one of the members died in the early 90ties and they ONLY teamed together in the WWF for a short while, which means that ALL Colossal Connection pictures have WWF copyright on them - I think this is a "fair use" case where you wrongly deleted the picture, otherwise do please explain to me how to obtain a "free use alternative" when one guy is dead because I'm very curious MPJ-DK 21:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

If one of the guys is dead, then the image isn't replaceable. Let me know the image name and I'll undelete it. It still has to comply with all the other fair use criteria, though. —An gr 05:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

the image is "ColConnection.jpg" and I recently discovered this tag for WWF pictures used when no other alternative is available {{WWE-photo}} since they no doubt own the copyright to the picture. Thank you, I'm still pretty new to the whole WIki experience and photo uploading MPJ-DK 08:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you can help me out with something else I've been wondering about - if there is a person who's physical apperance has changed significantly from the time period the article describes to now (if he's a wrestler who lost his mask and is now retired is the best example I can think off) would the rational that "no free alternative" is available be acceptable? Since he's taken off his mask a current picture would not actually be representative in the article in question? MPJ-DK 09:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You'd have to make a very good case for it in the fair use rationale, and devote at least a paragraph in the article to discussing how his appearance has changed, in order to comply with the fair-use criterion that fair-use images be used for critical commentary, and not purely decoratively. —An gr 09:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you that's extremly helpful. MPJ-DK 10:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 03:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

Sanjay Kirloskar Picture

Dear Sir,

I noticed you deleted Mr. Sanjay Kirloskar's picture. I had included the link where I found it. http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/iw/2005/11/13/stories/2005111302580800.htm

Please do let me know the legitimate process to upload an image for this person. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Talik2 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

Hi, the problem is that the picture you uploaded can only be used under a claim of "fair use", but Wikipedia policy is that fair-use images of living people are not allowed in most cases, since it would be possible for someone to make a freely licensed image of the person in question. —An gr 05:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

G_Ben_Thompson.jpg

On March 3, you deleted Image:G_Ben_Thompson.jpg as a "replaceable image" -- this is incorrect. The image used was specific to the article about Gaither Ben Thompson, discussing his claims to ownership of a Bahamas property. There are no other known images of Mr. Thompson, and no reasonable way to obtain such; as a notable, but not public figure there is no means to replace the image.

The image fulfills the requirements of Fair Use Policy, in particular "No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information. " Further, as I provided a fair use rationale in the image description, as per policy, it was not a candidate for speedy-deletion; it should have been placed at Wikipedia:Images_for_deletion. I would request it be restored; and if you still desire it to be deleted, to place it at WP:IFD. Thanks, --Leflyman^Talk 09:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

It was a speedy candidate because you uploaded it with the "fair use image of a living person" tag from the dropdown menu, which automatically tags the image for speedy deletion. As far as I can tell from the article, he is a living person and not a recluse, meaning a freely licensed image of him could be made. That makes the fair-use image of him replaceable and in violation of Wikipedia policy. —An gr 11:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

As a non-public figure, he is akin to a "recluse". Granted, a free image could be made, if some persons were to track down Thompson's home address in Myrtle Beach, make their way to his property, peek in his windows and snap clandestine photos. But then, that would be considered an invasion of privacy, and again, as noted at WP:FU would not be reasonable. That is why there are Fair Use exceptions, which this image fulfills. It was non-decorative, as it presented information that was not available in the text of the article. And because this image included a clear fair use rationale, speedy deleting it was contrary to policy. It should go to IfD, if you wish it to be removed. I again ask you to return the image, and follow the appropriate procedure. --Leflyman^Talk 20:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Looking over his article again, I think you're right about him being a non-public figure--so much so that he's too nonnotable for a Wikipedia article. He has absolutely no notability apart from his relationship with ANS that warrants him getting his own article at all. A redirect to her article is quite sufficient. —An gr 20:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

That is of course, in your opinion and you're welcome to place the article for AfD. However, he's had a number of articles written about him, which fulfills the requirements of WP:BIO. You still have not, however, responded to my request to follow policy by returning the image and placing it on IfD -- or should I have another admin do so?--Leflyman^Talk 21:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The correct venue for requesting undeletion of an image is WP:DRV. —An gr 21:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

On reflection, to speed this up, I'll place it at DRV. --Leflyman^Talk 21:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Here you go: An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:G Ben Thompson.jpg. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Leflyman^Talk 22:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The Biggest Loser (Australia)

Hi Angr, ~~would the reason you deleted the images at The Biggest Loser (Australia) because they're not fair use?~~ - replaceable images, living persons, taken from web site etc? And do you know if we can upload company logos into Commons? Wiki english has the license of fair use as long as there is a reason but there seems to be no equivalent at commons - is this correct? Thanks - Ctbolt 00:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

The Biggest Loser images were all tagged as replaceable because they're living people. And no, fair-use images such as logos can't be uploaded to Commons. —An gr 04:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

My very first template! Yay!!

Yo! So like how do I create a template in my user space and use it, dude? What are the rules regarding using it in mainspace articles?
There's a huge style decision I've taken with Sesotho language, but I fear it will result in too much repetitive HTML code; it won't LOOK different from other articles, but hovering your mouse over certain parts will reveal a pleasant surprise, and Template:H:title has the unfortunate side effect of underlining the text... Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 10:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

To create a template in your user space, just make a subpage of your user page: User:Zyxoas/Whatever. But if you're going to use the template in actual articles, why not just create it in Template space? —An gr 10:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Just in case your buddies, in an apoplectic paroxysm, decide to XfD it. Aren't there laws, statutes, bills, and constitutions (otherwise collectively known as alphabet soups) regarding the creating of templates in main space? If anything does happen I might not be around to stop it. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 15:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Not really. The only big no-nos are single-use templates (since there's no reason for them to be templates at all) and templates designed to save an editor a few keystrokes when typing. You could create it in your userspace first, let me take a gander at it, and if it seems unlikely to be TFD'd you can move it to main template space. —An gr 15:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Zyxoas/Hover. Another concern I have is that it only superficially differs from H:title, but then, that's the reason why I felt the need to create another template in the first place...
i say! hover thine rodente hither! Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 17:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you could discuss with the makers of {{H:title}} whether there's some way to add a parameter allowing the underlining to be turned off? For example, maybe one could add a parameter like underline=off to {{H:title}} that would turn underlining off, then you wouldn't have to create a whole separate and largely redundant template. —An gr 17:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

FYI: I have some tools that may simplify your "Where I have been" secton of your user page

I see you have a list of nations and/or states/provinces on your user page. I would like to offer you some templates for this task I created for my own list. One pair of templates will create entries identical to the one I use. (I suggest you copy my legend if you use them.) Other templates will provide just a flag or name (nation or province/state).

Highlights

All use a simple code.
- Nations are identified with a two letter top-level Internet domain code (except for the United States of America, which uses "USA").
- States and provinces are identified with postal codes (so far anyway).
Nation and state/province names are linked.
The low level templates return flag images with just the filename allowing you to control the image size and caption.
All flag images located so far are SVG.
If any flag images or names on your page officially change, your user page will get the update as soon as I know about it.

One drawback

Currently the province templates can only look up data for the United States of America and Canada. However, additional capability can be readily added. All I need to do is create a starter template and let you add the provinces.

**Templates to build a list of where you have been**
Enter this	Purpose	Sample output	Subst this template?
`{{User:Will Pittenger/templates/Flag Entry}}`	Creates an entry in the list of places where I have been. Rather than call this template, most will call a template listed below. They will call Flag Entry as needed for you.	*^‡^§ — Illinois (The state where I was born and grew up.)	No
`{{User:Will Pittenger/templates/Nation Flag Entry}}`	Creates an entry in the list of places where I have been	*^‡^§ — United States of America (I visited other nations, but have yet to live in any) — Canada (Year unknown as I was too young to remember) — Mexico (Twice: 1977, 1982)	No
`{{User:Will Pittenger/templates/Province Flag Entry}}`	Creates an entry in the list of places where I have been. Important: See the notes for GetProvinceName and GetProvinceFlag.	*^‡^§ — Illinois (The state where I was born and grew up.) — Ontario (Year unknown as I was too young to remember)	No

Note: Not all templates in this next category are listed in the interests of space. To see a list of the missing functions, please see {{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetProvinceName}} and {{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetProvinceFlag}}.

**Templates that look up the flag or name of a nation or province of a nation**
Enter this	Purpose	Sample output	Subst this template?
`{{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetCountryName}}`	Detemines the name of the country from a code	United States of America Canada	No
`{{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetCountryFlag}}`	Detemines the flag of the country from a code		No
`{{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetProvinceName}}`	Detemines the name of the country from a code. Note this relies on a series of templates that aren't listed here in the interests of space. You can find the complete list on the template's page. If a nation is not yet supported, you can add it in my namespace by asking for it on my talk page. I'll create a starter page and you finish it with the instructions I provide. The template also supports using templates from another user's namespace.	Illinois Ontario	No
`{{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetProvinceFlag}}`	Determines the flag of the country from a code. Note this relies on a series of templates that aren't listed here in the interests of space. You can find the complete list on the template's page. If a nation is not yet supported, you can add it in my namespace by asking for it on my talk page. I'll create a starter page and you finish it with the instructions I provide. The template also supports using templates from another user's namespace.		No

Will (Talk - contribs) 17:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

dotted = no

user:Patrick has modified the template. Thank you or your help. Could you maybe delete that subpage I created? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 23:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Spellchecker

You mentioned you used Microsoft Word for spell checking at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trembling Before G-d. I just wanted to let you know that the new version of Firefox (version 2) has spell checking built into the browser. It has been immensely helpful for me without having to open up something like Word. It also has the feature to right click on the red underlined word and display possible fixes, or you can add it to your dictionary. It's a very nice feature that has saved me from misspelling "immensely" just a minute ago :-) If you're interested in giving it a test drive, you can download it from this site: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/. If you're using IE 6.x or below, the tabbed browsing makes browsing Wikipedia easier too. -- Ash Lux ^{(talk | contribs)} 18:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I have that too. But what Firefox doesn't have that Word does is a way to say "Ignore all instances of this word right now" without adding it to the dictionary. That's why I prefer Word for documents that have a lot of repeated proper names and the like. —An gr 18:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Cool :-) I wonder if they're planning on putting that feature in? Probably, and hopefully it gets in soon. -- Ash Lux ^{(talk | contribs)} 19:02, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

...........like a bridge over troubled water.......

Hello Angr! Once again I'd appreciate your opinion/guidance. It's the same old problem really... King Lear on the Berlin page.. I've noticed you got "bored?" with Berlin but still hope you can help!

Urban Centres: User:Lear21 will insist on using "Urban Centres" as a sub-title for what I think is more like "Historical Sites & Places of Interest". I'm not sure if I understand what he means by Urban Centres and have asked him to explain: see Talk:Berlin. He always acts as if he's Lord of the Manor and reverts. I don't accept his arguments.. But if ..YOU.. tell me that "Urban Centres".. is OK then I'll "go quietly guv'".

I'm not stuck on the title "Historical sites & places of interest" and would accept another compromise name. Any advice?

--IsarSteve 10:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Stolen images

Angr, you were recommended as someone who has zero tolerance for stolen images. I must ask you to look into the activities of user smith006, his sock GeneralPatton and another possibe sock Brandmeister. I have tried the correct channels [2] but there are so many images and I am so inexperienced that I need some help of any expert.

Images uploaded by smith2006 that I have positively identified as copyright infringements (all are copyright under EU law) belong to two German photographers — Walther Frentz & Jäger Hugo. They are all copyright Ullstein Bild and Getty images respectively. Ullstein Bild have made a legal threat with regard to their images appearing on wikipedia before, (including all tagged Fair Use), this prompted all Frentz images to be removed [3]. Unfortunately Ullstein and Getty do not allow hotlinking beyond a set period of minutes but if you search at their website according to photographer you will see the images.

Images at issue

Successes: :2 Images stolen by smith2006 removed

2/3 Images stolen by smith2006 removed (blondi photo also remains on wikicommons)

smith2006 or one of his socks always labels the image Heinrich Hoffmann probably in a deliberate attempt to make discovery of the real copyright holder difficult. smith2006 doesnt know that Frentz and Hugo took the majority of color photos in this period, certainly the ones around the regime inner circle. Hoffmann worked mostly in black & white.

Remaining images

Confirmed Frentz (Copyright Ullstein Bild) Image:Hitler_Rommel_discussion_Generals.jpg, Image:Heinrich Himmler Murderer.jpg, Image:Heinz Guderian official.jpg, Image:Hermann Wilhelm Goering Offiziell.jpg, Image:JochemPeiper.jpg, Image:Josef Goebbels.jpg, Image:Karl Doenitz Color.jpg, Image:Speer portrait.jpg, Image:Erhard Milch.jpg, Image:AH Raeder Kriegsmarine.jpg, Image:Alfred Rosenberg Nazi Propagandist Antisemite.jpg, Image:Berlin Reichskanzlei Interieur.jpg, Image:Dietrich 2.jpg, Image:Hans-Joachim Marseille2.jpg, Image:HausserPaulSS.jpg, Image:Herbert Otto Gille.jpg, Image:Kdf Wagen Hitler Himmler Wolfsschanze Ostpreussen.jpg, Image:Keitel 01.jpg, Image:Kesselring-albert.jpg, Image:Leon Degrelle Staatlicher Photo.jpg, Image:Martin Bormann Staatliche Photographie.jpg, Image:Von Ribbentrop Sohn.jpg, Image:Bock color3.jpg, Image:Von Manstein 01.jpg, WIKICOMMONS: Image:Hitler Blondi.jpg

Confirmed Hugo -birthday parade 1939 (Copyright Getty) Image:Condor Legion Parade.jpg, Image:Kondorlegion Parade Hitler.jpg, Image:Robert Ley2.jpg, Image:Wehrmacht 20th April 1939 Birthday Parade.jpg, Image:Raeder color1.jpeg

Unconfirmed copyright (so far): Image:Wehrmacht_Anschluss.jpg, Image:Kurlandfront.jpg, Image:Peiper Jochen or Joachim.jpg, Image:HausserPaulSS.jpg

Please bear something in mind; the profiles are of top nazi officials, all of whom were either dead or alive and captured at end of WW2. Either way they were photographed by the Allies- free images. smith2006 has not bothered to source these, nor has he noticed that in the majority of cases the articles already contain free images which describe the object. How can he then claim Fair Use? smith2006 has just gone to a fansite like ww2incolor.com and downloaded the ones he likes best!!

One last thing, I am not trying to short circuit the system by appealing to you, I just do not have the time to list each and every infringement and fend off defenders of smith2006's behavior. I hope you look into this and checkuser suspect accounts to discover what else has been uploaded. This user should be permabanned for deliberately abusing his upload privileges but from looking at his talk page he has yet to figure out the rules. I have crossposted this to user Jkelly. Thank You both.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.118.110.180 (talk • contribs)

I got this as well, as mentioned above. They do indeed look problematic. I left a note for User:Smith2006. Jkelly 03:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The picture of Azmi Bishara you've deleted: where should i look for an alternative?

Hello,

At 21:21, 7 March 2007 you deleted the file "Image:Azmi Bishara.jpg". You stated the following reason: "I7 (replaceable fair use)". ([4]) Would you please suggest to me, where i should look for an alternative, free picture? Thanks. Itayb 13:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Flickr is often a good source for free images, but you have to make sure the image is licensed CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. Otherwise, if you know someone in Jerusalem, you could ask them to go take his picture next time he's expected to make a public appearance. If he's ever visited Washington DC in an official capacity, there may also be photos of him that are public domain as works of the U.S. Federal Government. —An gr 13:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Itayb 13:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I've searched Flicker for "Bishara". No appropriate picture was found. I've searched Yahoo! for all these words: "azmi bishara", restricting the search to Creative Commons licensed content. No appropriate picture was found (actually, i've found a video interview with Bishara: [5] (which i've already used as a reference in the article), but it is licensed under a NoDerivs license, so it's impossible to take a screen shot of the video and use it, and it would be pushing a POV planting the video as is in the article.) I've searched Yahoo! for pictures as well as for articles containing all these words: "azmi bishara" in the the ".gov" domain. No appropriate picture was found.

Under these circumstances, would i be justified to use Bishara's picture from the Knesset site (the one you deleted), claiming irreplaceable fair use? Itayb 14:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, no, because someone in the future could still make a freely licensed photo of him. Jimbo has said that in cases like this it's better to have no image at all than a nonfree one. Wikipedia policy is quite clear that fair-use images of living people are almost never allowed. —An gr 14:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Angr, for patiently answering my questions. I'd like to take advantage of your patience and ask you a couple more things, please.

I've inserted into the Azmi Bishara article a quote excerpted from the above mentioned video interview (see the folowing diff: [6]). Should i take it off, in view of the fact that the interview was released under a CC NoDerivs license?
More generally, i've used direct quotation from copyrighted sites (particularly newspaper sites, such as the Jerusalem Post and the Ha'aretz online editions) in several places in the article. In all cases these quotes are used to support factual claims. Should they be removed? Itayb 15:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I would say it's better to summarize his statements in your own words and provide a reference to the article where you found them rather than give direct quotes, especially the lengthy first one in the diff you gave. Not only for copyright reasons, but because it's better encyclopedic style. —An gr 15:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Will do. Itayb 16:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. :) You wrote: "Wikipedia policy is quite clear that fair-use images of living people are almost never allowed." What about copyrighted pictures of dead people? Take, for instance, Pearse Jordan. I've found a photo of him in an internet edition of a newspaper, which copyrights its content. Can this picture be uploaded to Wikipedia according to the "irreplaceable fair use" criterion? Itayb 09:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... photos made by news agencies generally can't be used, quite apart from the replaceability issue, because news photographers make their living from them, so using them runs afoul of criterion 2 as exemplified by counterexample 5. In this case, however, the picture is credited to Pearse Jordan himself, so it must be some privately made photo of him. (A school photo maybe? It looks like a mugshot.) At any rate, it certainly wouldn't be considered replaceable by a free image. —An gr 09:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I began the process of uploading this image, but when i reached the point when i had to choose a license for it from the pop-up list, i realized that i should probably not upload it after all (i saw no adequate entry, except for embarrassing ones like "Found the picture somewhere"). Itayb 12:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello once more... I've had an idea about the Azmi Bishara picture: i'd like to have an icon of a picture displayed where his photograph used to be. When readers click the icon, their browser displays the Knesset page, where the photograph is from (possibly in a different window). Alternatively, beneath the icon there's the URL of this Knesset page. Could you please help me accomplish this/direct me to a Wikipedian who could help me with it/direct me to a page with appropriate instructions? Thanks. Itayb 18:25, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

←I have no idea if that's technically possible. You could ask at WP:VP/T for assistance. —An gr 18:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Itayb 20:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I've found a solution: i used a picture of a camera (from Commons) as an icon, and linked the underscript to the reference to the Knesset page with Bishara's photograph: [7]. Do i have your approval? Itayb 21:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Brady Bunch cast photos

Re: your recent "replaceable fair use" notices on my talk page, how do you create a free image of child actors from thirty years ago? They're all notable solely because of that period of their lives and careers, such that a current photo of them as middle-aged adults would not adequately provide the same relevant information. Please remove your "replaceable fair use" tags from those images. Postdlf 16:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Their articles are about their entire careers, not about their characters on the Brady Bunch. Modern-day images of the actors will be quite adequate to illustrate the articles. —An gr 16:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like an argument for having current photos of them in addition to the child photos, not instead of. Current photos simply cannot stand in for photos of them as child actors from thirty years ago, and those child roles remain what they are most known for. Postdlf 16:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

There are already pictures of them as children at Characters of The Brady Bunch. There's no reason to have even more "fair use" images in the actors' articles. —An gr 16:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Beyond making sure Wikipedia is not hosting two different images of Alice the Maid unnecessarily, what does the image content of one article have to do with another? There's no reason why the actor articles and the character article can't both use the same fair use image, as with whenever there is an overlap of content (e.g., musician and album articles). Postdlf 17:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The point is, the screenshots have a much stronger fair use claim in the characters' article than in the actors' articles. As long as the actors' articles point to the characters' article, where there are already two pictures of the whole cast, there's no reason to have additional photos of each additional character. —An gr 20:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

List of images

I came across User:Durin/Husnock_images at MfD. This page seems to list numerous images that lack proper Wikipedia licenses. There seems to be some heat developed over this and I was hoping that you would address this matter. As for lacking licenses, here is my analysis. A derivative work is a violation of a holder's copyright in many countries if created without permission. For this permission to be valid, Wikipedia requires this permission to be on file with the Wikipedia Communications committee. See when permission is confirmed. After the Wikipedia Communications committee receives the permission, somebody with access to OTRS will come along and tag the article or image with {{PermissionOTRS|ticket=http://linktoticket.org }} providing evidence of the received email and clearing the status of the item in question. Until that time, the image may proceed through a normal deletion process. These images lack PermissionOTRS tickets or do not seem to have valid licenses per Wikipedia. Would you please look into this? Thanks. -- Jreferee 21:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Backlog template

Thanks, I found the problem and fixed it. I had been checking if Category:Replaceable fair use images to be decided after 21 February 2007 existed: ie, with the extra "images" in there, so it skipped on down. Should work now. Mango juice^talk 21:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Berkely→Berkley

Regarding [8]: the city in California, at least, is actually spelled Berkeley. —An gr 09:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed it is! D'oh! I've fixed up the mistake in my bot. Thanks for that, CmdrObot 15:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

U+0361

Hello there.

Could you possibly do one minor little favour for me? Please go over to Sesotho and look at the table of affricates under the Consonants section.

Does that over-bar look right on your browser? If not, is this a problem only on some computers or did the guy who wrote the table make a mistake? If I simply move the bars to the right will that be sufficient or will it look funky on some other browsers?

Is this related to the problem with vowels in Indian scripts?

Also, shouldn't the 2 laterals that are listed under plosives be with the affricates instead? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 16:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem is with the font Arial Unicode MS. It has a bug that makes the overbar appear much further to the left than it ought to. This is mentioned at International Phonetic Alphabet#Affricates and double articulation. It should stay the way it is, but if you know how to force a font in markup (I don't), you could do that so the text appears in a different font than Arial Unicode. Or you could leave the tie bar out altogether; it isn't really necessary. And yes, those are lateral affricates and should be listed with the other affricates. —An gr 16:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh right. But I had the weird feeling that the CSS used by the IPA template (the reason why this section of text might look a tad weird if you look closely enough) was supposed to fix that -- see Template talk:IPA.

Thanks once again. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 22:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

A w sound

which sounds like a w sound made without rounding the lips.

*cringe* But I suppose it must be done :) Haukur 20:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. If you have any ideas how to dumb the article down without making sound stupid, feel free to implement them. —An gr 09:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Ralf König

Hi Angr. I see you removed Image:Ralfkoenigpanel.gif, and register that you are not the greatest fan of fair use imagery and are devoted to the issue. But I am puzzled, so just to confirm this: you do not feel this illustration falls within the WP:FU policy. I think the image illustrates the text next to which it appears, is of lower resolution than the original, does not limit the copyright owner's rights to market or sell the work in any way, and is used on various websites, so its use on Wikipedia does not make it significantly more accessible or visible than it already is etc.. I also think an article about a comics creator without an inkling of visuals showing the nature of the work described in text is amputated, so really I wish you could elaborate upon the brief reasoning "img is not fair use here". Thanks, MURGH ^disc. 12:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Please read what the tag on the image says: Comic panels may be used only "to illustrate the scene or storyline depicted, or the copyrighted character(s) or group(s) depicted on the excerpted panel in question". Please see also fair use criterion 8: "The material must contribute significantly to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text) and must not serve a purely decorative purpose." The text it was next to was König's biography; no mention of Der Bewegte Mann or the character of Axel Feldheim is made (or would be appropriate there). If you want to start an article on the Der Bewegte Mann/Pretty Baby series, the image could probably be used there. —An gr 13:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

righto, thx MURGH ^disc. 13:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Angr

You might want to re-create your irish maps based upon commons:Image:Ireland.svg ;-) — Nicholas (reply) @ 21:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Why? Is there something wrong with them the way they are? —An gr 05:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Brown Quote. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 4five 18:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

RE: Article Ho Hwee Long (adapted from http://www.vpa.nie.edu.sg/music/hohweelong/index.htm)

Dear Angr,

I hope that you can review the deletion of this particular article. The reason given for the deletion of this article in the deletion log was that the content had been taken from this particular website: http://www.vpa.nie.edu.sg/music/hohweelong/index.htm. Hence I assume that the reason for deletion was a possible copyright infringement of this webpage. However, I would like to clarify that the creators of the wikipedia article Ho Hwee Long are associated with the National Institute of Education Symphonic Band (NIESB), which is one of the performing arts branches under the NIE visual and performing arts department. The NIE is an educational institution and the profile of Associate Professor Ho Hwee Long as provided on the website is available for all to use for non-commercial purposes, as long as it is reproduced in its entirety. Hence the wikipedia article on A/P Ho is not a copyright infringement of this webpage.

Also, another reason earlier stated for the deletion of this article was that A/P Ho may not fulfill wikipedia's criteria for posting articles on musicians. I hope that these doubts about A/P Ho's notability have since been dispelled by the points that I and another user have listed on the deletion review page.

I apologise for not stating the source of the content earlier. This is the first time that I am creating a wikipedia article and I hope that I have not caused too much inconvenience to you and any other administrator.

Regards.
Lmao123 08:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

If the information is available for non-commercial purposes only, Wikipedia can't use it. Although Wikipedia itself is non-commercial as a website, it may be sold in a print or CD version someday. Also, some content may be reused by others for commercial purposes. Therefore, Wikipedia policy is not to accept material that is licensed for non-commercial use only. —An gr 08:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I would like to correct myself here. The profile of A/P Ho on the given page is not for non-commercial purposes ONLY. It is a free-use article that has been used whenever appropriate for anything related to A/P Ho. For example, concerts which feature A/P Ho would commonly use this profile of him in the concert booklet. Some of these concerts are for profiteering purposes. Another example of the free use of this article would be illustrated on this webpage: http://www.musefestival.com/judgesandcriteria.htm#. The article is once again used as a profile of A/P Ho's career to certify his position as a judge for this particular competition. As such, the article is indeed on a free use license. In conclusion, I hope that you can kindly approve this article. Thank you. Lmao123 09:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Not in that form, no. There's no reason to copy-and-paste the information from that page instead of just writing an article about him in your own words. That said, I'm still unconvinced that he's notable enough to warrant an encyclopedia article. Please read the notability criteria listed at Wikipedia:Notability (music). If you feel he meets those criteria, you can rewrite the article to focus on the aspects of his career that show how he meets them. Please remember to attribute the statements you make to reliable sources--independent of Prof. Ho and those who know him personally--so that others can verify the information. Also, please remember to write from a neutral point of view; the reader shouldn't get the impression that the Wikipedia article is praising (or condemning) Prof. Ho. —An gr 12:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The reliability of the source cannot be questioned since at least two separate organisations completely unaffiliated with each other use the same profile of A/P Ho. This is illustrated in the two separate websites provided in previous arguments. Also, I personally see no problem with the neutrality of the article. It merely traces out A/P Ho's musical career, but it does not go to extraordinary lengths to "praise" A/P Ho. It does not mention minor achievements and points of interest such as listing out all of his arrangements and compositions or elaborating on him being featured in a 45-min interview on national television in 2005. Coincidentally, these are also evidence that A/P Ho more than fulfills the criteria from Wikipedia:Notability (music). However, as a musician, his work is centred around music and hence I believe that the content as of current is relevant enough and should not be changed in any way, as you have suggested. Should you still see any problem with the article, please indicate clearly the particular sections which do not seem relevant or neutral, rather than deeming the entire article inappropriate. Lastly, I would like to emphasise the fact that this is not the only article which copies directly from free use content. There are plenty of other articles on wikipedia which takes content straight off from other websites. If there are no problems with those articles, I do not see why the article on A/P Ho should be so heavily scrutinized when I have in fact shown the relevance of the article and also the free use licensing of the content. Lmao123 16:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

My two cents, and I'm just adding this so that it cam be seen as more than just "one-on-one". Wikipedia frowns upon having content copied verbatim from Internet websites, especially where it is impossible to determine for 100% sure what the copyright status is. I would say that between the AFD, nomination, and DRV, that there is a consensus among established editors of Wikipedia that the article as it stood is inappropriate for Wikipedia, due to it having been copied verbatim. Therefore, trying to convince people to put the content back verbatim would be a waste of your time. This really makes the only option to rewrite the source into your own words prior to posting it here. While a number of editors are confirmed of Ho's notability, the only way to achieve a proper debate at this point on his own merits is to rewrite the article, in your own words, attributing your sources. Andy Saunders 16:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ho_Hwee_Long. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Lmao123 14:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

If there are other articles on Wikipedia using text straight off of other websites, they should be deleted as well, unless the original article is clearly marked as being in the public domain or licensed under the GFDL. This website is neither. The fact that the same text appears on two different website means either (1) one of them is violating the other's copyright, or (2) one of them is using it with the other's permission. Because Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia, we don't use material by permission. We use images and music samples sometimes under a fair use claim, if they couldn't be replaced by a free equivalent, but text can always be replaced by a free equivalent. —An gr 16:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

It started with a ....

....a simple edit:

I changed Cathedral of Magdeburg to Magdeburg Cathedral.. at Talk:€2_commemorative_coins#Magdeburg_Cathedral and since then...

Please can YOU tell me if Magdeburg Cathedral is correct as a title or is Cathedral of Magdeburg (doch) OK?? Talk:Cathedral of Magdeburg#Name Change. My argument is: We don't say Cathedral of Westminster, we say Westminster Cathedral.

But User:Nightstallion has been a bit difficult. I've been away from GB so long, I'm not sure if I'm going dulali or not. For your advice, I am as ever welly grateful.--IsarSteve 15:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Translation request

Hello! I'm trying to clean up the Danube articles (Shoes on the Danube Promenade, Danube Promenade, etc.), but have run into a problem, namely that I know neither German nor Hungarian to any great extent and some of the red links on those pages can be found in the German wikipedia. Would you be interested in translating de:Gyula Pauer, for instance? I'd be grateful and hope that I could return the favor someday. -Yupik 17:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The trouble is that the German Wikipedia has no culture of citing its sources, and indeed de:Gyula Pauer is completely unsourced. It would probably be better to research him on your own and write a new article from scratch that does cite its sources rather than translating the unreliable German Wikipedia article. —An gr 20:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, that would be problematic as I don't really have extra time due to work and school constraints. Even now I'm avoiding reading 250 pages of Swedish and Danish for a class that was supposed to be in English :D -Yupik 22:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Gaelic

I'm not sure why you removed "Gaelic" from the opening of "Irish language". "Gaelic" is one of two primary names for the language. It's not a rarely used alternative name - at not least in speech - it is a common way of denoting it, and can't be dismissed as a deviant only used in the ignorant Irish diaspora. I was just at a talk by the Irish historian Enda Delaney, and he called the language "Gaelic" (he also called it Irish later in the talk, without apparently thinking about it); one of my best friends, who has no interest whatsoever in language politics, and who is Irish (son of the ex Irish ambassador to South Korea), always calls it "Gaelic". I'm not exhausting my experience here btw, I could go on! Being discussed elsewhere in the article doesn't seem relevant to me ... everything in the opening is discussed elsewhere in the article, that is the point of the opening. BTW, on a separate topic, and under your hat as an experienced admin, one person tried to remove my template on American English; the template is only tongue and cheek, but do you think I should actually remove it? Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 15:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

(1) The word "Gaelic" is a highly ambiguous. While it's true Irish is often referred to as "Gaelic", Scottish Gaelic is also often referred to as "Gaelic", and probably more frequently than Irish is. Starting out the article with "Irish or Gaelic" conveys an authority on an ambiguous word that it shouldn't have. I wouldn't mind starting it with "Irish or Irish Gaelic" though, since "Irish Gaelic" is unambiguous, and the name used in Ethnologue. (2) It's up to you. I know I get pissed off at editors who have tongue-in-cheek (not "tongue and cheek") userboxes that are derogatory toward American English, so it's not surprising if others get pissed off at userboxes that are derogatory toward un-American English. —An gr 16:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

(1) Well, the language is referred to simply as Gaelic prolly more often than Irish Gaelic, which is why it originally had [Irish] Gaelic. Someone deleted the [Irish] part, which was the point that you got to it. (2) I've always thought the irony and tongue-and-cheek (didn't know you linguists believed in usage prescription) nature of my userbox should be obvious by the fact that I'm not an American user. Frankly, pissing off a few people who are obsessed with and hold their identity to a few meaningless spelling differences doesn't really bother me. That of course is not the box' intention. I was just asking to find out if i can defend my right to keep it and get away with it. Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Tron Kirk

Please say why you deleted the image which I can only interpret as vandalism. You know, some of us are going to a great deal of trouble to dig these out of copyright images up and spend time scanning etc. Please explain your actions on the Talk Pages when you do things like this. David Lauder 21:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I deleted Image:Tron.jpg because you had uploaded it with the "fair use image of an existing building" tag on it, which automatically tags the image for deletion. Since the image was first published in 1906, over 100 years ago, you ought to have tagged it {{PD-old}}, as I have now done (after undeleting it). In the future, you might want to be more careful about correctly tagging the images you upload and less eager to accuse administrators of vandalism. —An gr 21:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

My apologies. I thought I had correctly labelled it according to guidelines given to me by another administrator. I wish Wikipedia could simplify these rules a bit more. David Lauder 08:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Irish phonology FA

Congratulations! :) It is well deserved. Haukur 00:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sartzetakhs2.jpg

Hi Angr,

I would really like to avoid another discussion like the Chandrasekhar.gif one for many reasons. So I would like to ask you since this picture has appeared in Greek newspapers, tv etc. If I change the tag to newspaper would it be ok? Thanks. Dr.K. 00:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Please read counterexample 8 of Wikipedia's fair use policy. —An gr 10:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the repeated intrusion of your talk page but Sartzetakis is 77 now and not very active. I don't think that it is realistic to expect to get a picture of him at this stage. He is rather like a rare bird so to speak. Must we wait until he dies and bring the picture back? Thanks. Dr.K. 23:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Image of statue of Maharana Pratap

Hello Angr, It is strange why did you delete image of statue of Maharana Pratap.I would like to know the reason.

--Shivbramh 04:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you give me the name of the image please? —An gr 10:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes it is the image of statue of Maharana Pratap.The statue is visible on the top of a hiil called Moti Magri situated in Udaipur Rajasthan India.Any body can go there but need a ticket to visit and take photographs.The hill is very near to Fatah Sagar lake and circuit house of Udaipur.You must be knowing the history of Udaipur.When Akbar attacked Chittor in 1568.Rana Udai Singh father of Maharan Pratap and son of Rana Sanga left the fort.He found a new town known as Udaipur.Udaipur remained capital of Mewar till its accession in India around 1949. It is still a divisional headquarter of Rajasthan.Maharana Pratap is a well known person and famous for his gallentry.The government of Rajasthan also declared his birth day as a holiday.

I would like to request, please dont delete image of such a heroic person.But if you find better Image include it.It is image of the statue.There are some paintings also.But no photo graphs because there wasnt any technique like photographs at his time.

--Shivbramh 14:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I assume the image in question is Image:Rana Pratap on Chetak.jpg. Where did the image come from? Did you take the photograph yourself? Did you find it on a webpage? You didn't provide any source information when you uploaded the picture. —An gr 14:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

You dont have to assume it is image of Rana or Maharana Pratap's statue situated at Moti Magri Udaipur.I have known the place and the Image long back.However I am not certain this perticulerly pic was taken by me or not.It might be possible that it is downloaded from a web page or CD.I also have another pic of the same taken by me but not so clear.Well image of Taj Mahal taken by differnt angles and by different persons can not be copyright.It can not be questionable if it appeared in Greek News papers and all that.But I am sad to know that you put too many questions about it.I am sure at least 90% images in Wikipedia taken from web pages.I personally feel some crooked persons want to destroy history and want to defame Rajputs.If you are reallly not of that stock kindly restore it unless it is challenged by the copyright holder himself.If it was a copyright why did it appear in Greek news papers.Did they obtain licence from the auther of this perticulerly image.Image of a famous person can appear anywhere in the world.Still its your choice delete it if you want.But I am sure ask your soul before doing it.

--Shivbramh 15:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a very strict policy on the use of images. Basically, we only allow images that are subject to copyright (so-called "fair use" images) under very limited conditions; please read Wikipedia:Fair use. We don't wait for copyright holders to complain, and we don't care what Greek newspapers may or may not have done. And incidentally, different photographs of this statue or of the Taj Mahal certainly are copyrightable; every photographer has the right to license his own photographs however he likes. If you have taken a photograph of this statue yourself, please upload that image and use one of the licenses at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators on it. —An gr 16:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I dont understand so much.Kindly apply your criteria everywhere in Wikipedia.But since you have choosen to apply it to this image only what can I do.May god give you so much mind to distiguish between right and wrong.I am not a lawyer.

Dhram rahasi, rahasi dhara khis jase khursan Amar Vishambhar upare rakh nahacho ran

Name for Scots in Irish

Hi Angr - there's a discussion going on at ga.wikipedia at the moment about what the title for the article on the Scots language should be. I seem to recall reading an interesting talk page conversation that you had with someone over this very subject (indeed, I commented at an early point in the discussion) but I cant remember what page, and Google isn't helping (it doesn't seem to cache mainspace talk pages). If you're interested, could you weigh in with your opinions at ga:Plé úsáideora:Robocop? By the way, congrats for your work on Irish phonology! --Kwekubo 01:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I vaguely remember it too, but I also can't find it, nor can I remember what I said at the time. —An gr 04:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Andy Malcolm image deletion

Dear Mr Angr. I see you deleted the image of my father playing football for West Ham Image:Andy Malcolm WHU Football Player.jpg which took me an evening of work to figure out how to upload - so I'm very disheartened and slightly angry to see it removed. As a novice user it would have been more helpful for me if you had given some reasoning. Please can you advise how this image should be labelled. Thanks NailsworthNick 22:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

It got deleted because when you uploaded it, you labeled it as a fair-use image of a living person, which automatically tags the image for deletion, because Wikipedia policy doesn't allow fair-use images of living people in most circumstances (see counterexample 8 of the fair use policy). Do you know who the photographer is? If so, you could ask him to release the image under a free license such as the GFDL or one of the Wikipedia-compatible Creative Commons Licenses. The important thing is that the photographer not gives permission to Wikipedia alone, but rather that he gives permission for anyone to reuse the image, including for commercial purposes and to make derivatives. Alternatively, since Andy Malcolm is your father, you could take a picture of him yourself and upload that, using one of the licenses at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators. —An gr 05:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. The photo was taken between 1953 and 1962 and shows Andy playing football wearing a West Ham team strip - I was given the photo by him and have no idea who took it over 40 years ago. I do not think that a picture of Andy age 73 would do justice to the article really - I would prefer a picture showing him as a player - a piece of history - he was at the time a very well known figure particularly in East London. Any other possibilities ?NailsworthNick 22:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Mr Angr. please can you advise how I should get this picture of my father instated to illustrate the article - thanks NailsworthNick 21:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Done

Dear Mr Angr. I'd just like to alert you to the fact that I applied the changes to Sesotho language yesterday.

No, I wasn't asking all those questions just to make you angry (okay, maybe just a little), I really did spend a month and 3 days slaving away over a hot stove... I realise that the article is a bit long now and I'm working on that offline.

Could you possibly delete the old Image:Sesotho_vowel_chart.gif (I think it's on Meta) and perhaps also move those 18 files I uploaded yesterday to Meta?

The noise levels on those audio recordings are horrible and I'm only half planning on rerecording them, but Sesotho is a SPOKEN language first.

Thank you for all your help. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 18:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Instead of deleting the old version at Commons, I uploaded the new version on top of it and deleted the new name here at Wikipedia. That way there's only one name to have to keep track of, and it can be used in other languages as well. —An gr 18:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Name suggestion

Dear Angr,

I am a first generation Irish American. My mother was from Cork and my father from Mayo. They named me Bernard after my grandfather, but always called me Brian. My driver's license and most documents are in Brian. I love to travel Internationally, but since 911, I get extra scrutiny at airports. I'm thinking of changing my first name, but would love to stay with an Irish name. Bernard is a very old fashioned name in the US, and Brian is very common. Any suggestions? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.132.185.246 (talk) 02:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Image Deletion Questions

I have a few questions in response to some pictures I uploaded and their subsequent deletion/flagging by yourself. The first is Image:Kids_on_the_Ped.jpg‎ which was tagged for deletion over copyright issues that I hopefully have cleared up after being told of the problem. The second is over Image:Iowa_City_aerial.jpg. I don't understand why this one was deleted without any notice or chance to fix it. I am quite new to Wiki, and if you could help me by explaining what the problem was, and maybe how I can avoid the same thing and lighten your future workload a little that would be great. Any help would be GREATLY appreciated! American007 05:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

The trouble with both images is that they are copyrighted images used under a fair use claim. But Wikipedia policy does not allow such images if they are replaceable, and this one is: we don't need a copyrighted image of public places in Iowa City, because any Wikipedian in Iowa City could go and take a picture of them himself. Therefore, I'm retagging Image:Kids on the Ped.jpg as a replaceable fair use image. And what do you mean, you're "quite new to Wiki"? You've been here since July 2005! —An gr 05:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Why is the new Image:GaelicScotlandSpeakers2001.gif pretended to be deleted?

It is really much more clear and easily seen than the previous map for "Current distribution of Gaelic speakers in Scotland" version, which now has been reverted as "official map" in the "Scottish Gaelic language" article.

It conveys exactly the same information. There's no point in having two images conveying the same information. If you don't like the colors, you can change them on the existing image. —An gr 13:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

dear sir

I want to ask that why you removed pictures from Gujar khan Page..? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.101.191.30 (talk) 00:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

The images were deleted for having insufficient source information or for being "fair use" images of public places, which are replaceable by freely licensed images. —An gr 05:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

image deletion

You initially deleted Image:posner_1.jpg because it did not have adequate fair use documentation, which I understand. I replaced the initial photo with a new one that was open to Public use from Flickr, and provided a link where you could view it. The person who took this photograph (and if you follow the link you can see all their bio information) has expressly permitted public use of the photo. I am not sure what else you would like to see documented. Let's discuss but I would like to re-add the photo as I think it is appropriate. Perhaps documentation needs improved? PadreNuestro 13:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The Flickr page you linked to said clearly "© All rights reserved"; nevertheless you put a {{GFDL}} tag on it. It isn't licensed by the GFDL, or by a Wikimedia-suitable Creative Commons License. "This is a public image" on Flickr only means you don't have to be a logged-on user to see the picture; it says nothing about using the image. "All rights reserved" means it's an unfree image, so we can't use it here. Anyone in the vicinity could take a picture of the building and release it under a free license, so there's no reason to use a copyrighted image of it (and doing so violates Wikipedia policy). —An gr 13:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

If I personally know the person who took the photo and they gave me express permission to use it, would that change anything? Also, not familiar with the creative commons stuff you're talking about (fairly new to all this). Once I get this person's express permission to use this do I need to do anything else? Let me know, thanksPadreNuestro 13:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

You can read about the Creative Commons Licenses at that article. The ones that are acceptable are CC-BY (attribution) and CC-BY-SA (attribution, sharealike). "NC" (noncommercial) and "ND" (no derivatives) licenses are not acceptable. If you know the photographer, try to persuade him to change his Flickr licensing to CC-BY or CC-BY-SA so that Wikipedia can use it. Permission for Wikipedia to use the image isn't actually enough, because Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia, meaning our material has to be reusable by others, even for commercial purposes. —An gr 13:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Clark

Hi sir, thank you for your good advice i really appreciate it. It is to soon to nominate myself for adminship indeed. I am not the kind of user that edits really. I only read but as i have spent alot of time on reading articles i´ve discovered users who do not follow Wikipedia´s policy. Therefor i am sure i can become an admin more quickly than most in order to convince and help users who are in trouble, to make them better users for Wikipedia. I´ve read almost everything there is to know about Wikipedia. I also would like to help with images as i see many risk to put Wikipedia in legal jeopardy so i hope to help with that aswell. Please write to me again if you still think i should be giving a quick adminship. Thanks Clark 14:58, 23 March 2007

Not the kind of user who edits really? That's a laugh. Virtually none of the vandals who have attacked Wikipedia have more sockpuppets than this user. --Yamla 22:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of John Tait Professor

Hi, Please let me know what is the definition of notability? and is this a strong reason to delete my contribution about John Tait, this sounds very strange.

Anyway this wasn't a finished contribution and shouldn't be deleted, kindly return the con tent back.

Thank you Mustafa —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mabusalah (talk • contribs) 16:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

Please read WP:BIO for discussion of how to determine whether a person is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. —An gr 16:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Irish Gaelic and Gaeilge na hÉíreann

Can you please explain? Eog1916 17:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The terminology is discussed in the "Names of the language" section. The infobox should be kept short and sweet, using the most common names for the language, which is "Irish" in English and "Gaeilge" in Irish. Especially in Irish, it's only called "Gaeilge na hÉireann" if it's being contrasted with Scottish Gaelic and/or Manx. —An gr 17:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

help! my image is about to be deleted

Image:tycoonalex.jpg
i uploaded this image of myself, and it is about to be deleted because of copyright. how do i stop it being deleted as i want to use it for my user page.

image deletion

Hello! I noticed that you removed an image from the page: One SeaGate. I have spent time working on that article, and I just wanted to know why it was removed, and my options for replacement. Please comment back on my talk page. Thanks! Wpktsfs 22:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt reply. Wpktsfs 16:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I posted a new picture, which I took today.Wpktsfs 02:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Cajun French

Hello, I contacted you on your Wikimedia page about French in the United States. My feeling is that most people in Louisiana who speak French speak Cajun French, and what happened with the census is that some people named their dialect while others named the language, without that necessarily meaning that different answers meant that people spoke different things. It seems about 10% of French-speakers responded "Cajun" in Louisiana. While this didn't make too much of a difference in French in the United States since most people responded "French", the effect of assuming that only people who said "Cajun" speak Cajun French is dramatic on the page Cajun French, because the figures in the map are probably about 10 times lower than they should be. I would like to remove the map, and suggest a new one based on "French" + "Cajun" figures. I don't know how to make these maps, so I can't make a new one myself. I hope you won't be offended that I've removed the map. 169.229.140.70 02:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

It's probably a good idea to merge "French" and "Cajun French" together. I'll see what I can do about making a new map. —An gr 08:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Primitive Irish language / your deletion

Dear Angr, you say: "If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia"), and I say that N Ostler is a language professor and therefore his view on a possible semitic substrate should be included. PIL as a subject has by definition a small number of aficionados. Not saying NO is 100% right; maybe you also have written a 600+ page book on the history of languages, and know better? Can I just remove any reference in wikipedia because the underlying book was written by just one professor? I think not, but I am new to editing.Red Hurley 13:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The issue is not how many professors have written books on an issue, but how widely the theory itself is actually believed and/or discussed. There are only a handful of linguists who believe in a Semitic or Afro-Asiatic substrate for the Celtic languages; the vast majority of linguists with an opinion on the issue believe the idea isn't worth pursuing, and therefore completely ignore it in their writing. The fact that one or two cranks doggedly hold onto a theory despite the fact that there's no evidence to support it doesn't make the theory notable enough to be mentioned in Wikipedia. —An gr 13:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, we'll file him away as a crank. Pity, I enjoyed his book.Red Hurley 14:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Riya Book.png

The image was going through a replaceable fair use dispute, which have not closed yet. I, the unloader, have made have made considerable arguments to validate its fair use, and have made changes to the article that uses the image to conform to Wikipedia principles. It uses a plain fair use license tag, with elaborate rationales, provided with readily verifiable external links (not a logo, promotional, book cover, album art, screen shot or any such specific fair use tag). How did it become an image with a clearly invalid fair use tag; or it is an image that fails some part of the fair use criteria? The fair use dispute was about the first fair use criterion, not a clearly invalid fair use tag. Surely there must be mistake here. Aditya Kabir 13:47, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The tag is for an image with a clearly invalid fair use tag OR an image that fails some part of the fair use criteria. In this case, the image fails fair use criterion 1 in being replaceable. The rationale that's been written still doesn't explain why this particular photograph is so iconic that it must be used in the article. —An gr 13:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The argument also says that it was monumental event in her career, explained in detail on the article page. The argument can be debated, but should not go for speedy deletion. I hope there is still space for discussion on Wikipedia. Aditya Kabir 13:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Besides, the Invalid fair-use claim clause says - Media that fail any part of the fair use criteria and were uploaded after 13 July 2006 may be deleted forty-eight hours after notification of the uploader. I was nottified. But, that's a minor point. The discussioon is more important here. Aditya Kabir 14:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

It's been tagged for speedy deletion for several weeks now. The new {{db-i7}} tag doesn't change anything. —An gr 14:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I have expanded the rationale on the image page. Please advise. Would you prefer that I use the {{promotional}} tag used on image pages - Image:Claudia Schiffer Guess 1.jpg and Image:Kate Moss Calvin Klein.jpg? May be an IFD? Aditya Kabir 15:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not the one who will be deciding this. If I were I would have already either kept it with {{rk}} or deleted it. I just put the tag on as a reminder that the image is overdue for having a decision made. —An gr 16:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Fully agreed. Someone needs to decide on it, delete or whatever, though I'd like to keep it, I guess. Would you, please, lend me a hand and take it to IFD? I don't think I should be advocating a delete and take it to IFD myself. Thank you very much. Aditya Kabir 14:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think taking it to IFD will give you the result you want. Someday an admin will come along and make a decision on whether it's replaceable or not. If the case you've made is strong enough, it will be kept. —An gr 14:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Removal of tags

Hello.

Just to let you know that User:Deathrocker has removed the {{db-i7}} tag you inserted at Image:SerieATrophy.jpg.--TermsThey 18:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Angr. Just dropping by to apologize for any legitimate edits/tags of yours I may have obliterated while chasing after TermsThey and other sockpuppets of Panairjdde, who is a banned user. An IP range block can't be enforced because of how his ISP assigns addresses, so I'm trying to reinforce the message that he isn't permitted to edit (even though some of his edits may be incidentally correct). Thanks for your understanding. Dppowell 23:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused

I noticed that you tagged roughly 100 fairuse images (or more) for speedy deletion over at C:CSD. That actually confuses me a bit as to why you did that, and it makes it inadvertantly harder for csd patrollers to clear it, plus since you're an admin, you could have certianly deleted them yourself. Not sure what you were trying to do actually...--Wizardman 23:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The backlog of images awaiting deletion is too big for me to delete all by myself. But most admins don't bother deleting anything that isn't directly in CAT:CSD, which means the backlog in other categories just gets bigger and bigger. So images I can delete quickly (those that aren't in use) I delete, and those that are in use (meaning deletion goes slower because you have to remove red links) I tag for speedy deletion so that they don't just sit in their deletion categories for weeks and months before getting deleted. —An gr 04:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Image license question

Hello Angr. I have a quick question. Image:222tce.png has {{No rights reserved}}, but I can't upload it with Commonshelper with that tag. Would be acceptable to add {{PD-self}}, as that seems to be the case? How much deduction is reasonable in adding license tags? Really obvious stuff only I presume, but if it's none at all... Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd call it {{PD-ineligible}} as it doesn't seem to meet the threshold of originality required to claim copyright. —An gr 18:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

fair use in portals

there is currently a proposed amendment to include fair use images in the portal space at Wikipedia:Fair use/Amendment/Fair use images in portals2. I have decided to contact you because you expressed interest in this topic in the past. Please know that I am contacting all editors who partipated in discussions regarding this at WT:FUC. If you feel I contactd you in error, or just don't care :) please ignore me. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 22:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Why did you delete the Dramarama photo?

I had permission from the band to post that photo, so why did you remove it? It was from their press kit from the early 1990s. Thank you. I too was really unhappy to see it had been unceremoniously removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Schneile (talk • contribs) 03:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia can't use images by permission, because we are a free content encyclopedia whose material has to be reusable by others for any purpose, including commercial uses. Therefore Wikipedia policy requires that only freely licensed images of living people be used in most cases. You can read the fair use policy here. —An gr 04:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The Fair use images in the gallery for the article "Le Corsaire"

What exactly is your M.O. for going through the article on "Le Corsaire" and disputing the use of the images?

--Mrlopez2681 06:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Trying to get the article to comply with Wikipedia's fair-use policy. Almost none of the fair use images on that page do. —An gr 06:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Aside form this photo in the gallery (which I feel should be more pronounced anyway) - Image:Le Corsaire -nureyev -1.jpg, the rest of the photos can go, for they are not important really. --Mrlopez2681 06:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

List of The Wire episodes

Noting that you edited List of The Wire episodes within the last few months I wonder if you have an opinion about the use of screenshots in this article and would welcome your opinion here if you have time.--Opark 77 22:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Foodstuff in Slovak

Thanks for pitching in on my query. This was the first time I touted (and demonstrated) the WP Language Reference Desk to the e-community of English-language copyeditors that is CE-L (numbering over a thousand subscribers). It'll be interesting if this generates further interest and activity here. I'm always pleased to show off the positive features of Wikipedia, which as you're no doubt aware is often dismissed as untrustworthy due to its "written-by-volunteers" nature. Go, us! -- Cheers, Deborahjay 23:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Moabit

Just thought I'd mention: I only recently discovered Moabit when tracking down info on Berlin synagogues to cite in archival photo captions. Small world...! -- Deborahjay 23:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

There's a synagogue in Moabit??? —An gr 04:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean/imply/say that there is; there was. I encountered the name of the Moabit district in texts I was translating about a major pre-WWII synagogue on Levetzowstrasse, which our source text gives as situated in Moabit. That synagogue and another on Fasanenstrasse were destroyed (though I don't have details about the circumstances); the latter was rebuilt as Berlin's new Jewish community center; the former, to the best of my knowledge, was not. Read about these and others on this Berlin synagogues Web page. (See under Fraenkelufer Synagogue.) The pertinent photos of the Levetzowstrasse Synagogue before and after the war, held in the Ghetto Fighters' House archives, can be viewed on its online archive; Cat. Nos. 43339 and 14223-14229, respectively. Thanks for your interest! -- Cheers, Deborahjay 14:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Primitive Irish

We are told that this is/was spoken in the state of 'Ireland'???? Please explain.Eog1916 17:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

No, Primitive Irish was spoken on the island of Ireland at a time before there was a unified state on the island. —An gr 17:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

When was there a unified state? Eog1916 19:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Images in Article on Le Corsaire

Are you familiar with any free/public domain images of performances/performers in the ballet "Le Corsaire"? If so, then I can see how you could very well know that the images are replaceable.

I have sneaking suspicion that you know absolutely nothing concerning any free/public domain images of anything to do with the ballet discussed in the article Le Corsaire. With that, I do not understand how you could have any tagged the images in the manner that you did.

So what is the hold up? What person or what group of people are going to determine the fate of the use of these images?

--Mrlopez2681 10:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

What matters for Wikipedia policy is that free images could be made, not that free images already exist. Fair-use images are only allowed when there's something specific about the image in question that makes it unreplaceable. If the article discusses some specific performance of the ballet and the image depicts that particular performance being discussed, it's probably not replaceable. If the image is being used to show just any performance of it, it is. As for when the decision will be made, look at the backlog in Category:Replaceable fair use images to get a feel for how many other images there already are on which decisions have to be made. —An gr 10:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Problem user and WP:AN/I

Hi Angr, a difficult user (Chriscf) has reported me to WP:AN/I after I reverted some of his unsupported moves (to an article about a train station). It's an extremely lame situation, and other users have pointed this out, but he's now calling me a liar and claiming I used "the extra buttons," which I did not. I'd be grateful if you could take a look - there were no admins around in the original "discussion." Regards, ProhibitOnions ^(T) 07:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

The discussion seems to be going fine by now, there's not much for me to add. Everyone's on your side, and Chriscf is digging himself into a hole. —An gr 08:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Yup. Thanks for taking a look. Speaking of problematic users and articles being renamed, thanks for putting a certain article about a certain street back where it belongs. Regards, ProhibitOnions ^(T) 08:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. A certain user appears to have finally left the building. —An gr 09:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to bring this up again, but I'd like your advice as an admin of long standing. When I looked at the edit summary of the AN/I complaint, I discovered that Chriscf had heavily edited my initial response to his complaint three different times ([9] [10] [11]). I'm not sure what this is a violation of, but it isn't nice, and was quickly reverted by the other admins who spotted it.

Since his pattern of behavior has continued unchanged today (removal of tags, closure of a discussion begun by another user earlier the same day [12], accusing others of WP:POINT [13], etc.), I wonder if there's anything that could or should be done about this. Regards, ProhibitOnions ^(T) 19:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Image help

Another user (User:Buchanan-Hermit) deleted the File:Bell 222.JPG file from Wikipedia. He stated "Same filename on Commons; redundant". However, the file on Commons is named "Image:Bell 222.jpg" (not .JPG). This would not ordinarily be a problem, except there is another file named "Image:Bell 222.jpg" on Wikipedia. It is a very small, poor-quailty, doctored image that is not as good as the one he deleted. I have posted a mesage on his talk page, but he may not know how to solve the problem, or may not be willing to fix it himself.

So, is there a way to specify a commons image rather than the Wikipedia image, or will one of the files have to be renamed? Thanks for any assistance you can provide. And thanks for the courtesy you show in removing images you delete from the articles, and even in making others aware of the problems before deleting their images. - BillCJ 18:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

No, there's no way to specify a Commons image rather than a local image. The local image will always take precedence. One or the other of them will have to be renamed, which means downloading it to your hard disk and uploading it again under a different name, then nominating the version under the old name for deletion. You could ask Rsduhamel, the uploader of the small, local image, if he's willing to re-upload it under a different name. —An gr 18:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I thought that's what would have to be done, but was hoping for a quicker way. I'll probably just re-upload the inage on COmmons, so I can start using that image imediately, rather than waiting the Wiki image to be deleted. Do you have the link to nominate images for deletion on Commons? THanks. - BillCJ 18:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've reloaded the file as "Image:Bell 222a.jpg". - BillCJ 19:02, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I've replaced Commons:Image:Bell 222.jpg with Commons:Image:Bell 222a.jpg everywhere it was used (German, Norwegian, and Swedish Wikipedias), and deleted Commons:Image:Bell 222.jpg. —An gr 19:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so muc. User:Buchanan-Hermit did contact me, and admitted he didn't think to check for the problem. Everything is fine now. Thanks again! - BillCJ 19:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

What's amusing is when an image is deleted here and a completely different image has the same name at Commons. The Commons image then appears on the Wikipedia article, leading to absurdities like this one. —An gr 19:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)