User talk:Eric Corbett

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Malleus Fatuarum)
Jump to: navigation, search

Non-free rationale for File:Stimson Storm.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Stimson Storm.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 19:44, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Stimson Sting 02.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Stimson Sting 02.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 02:34, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

UK census data[edit]

Hallo Eric, I noticed that you tweaked a ref to the census without realising that the link was dead. Alarmingly we probably have thousands of dead links after ONS revamped their census data website. Data for parishes, wards, etc is now available from Nomis - go to https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/sources/census_2011_ks/report and input the placename. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Neighbourhood_Statistics for more info. I've fixed Calverley. @Keith D: was developing a template for this but I'm not sure how far he got - possibly was still waiting for a reply from me? PamD 23:28, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Correct, I was waiting for a reply from you before going any further, so had parked it while attempting to sort out some of the mess over English Heritage & Heritage England. Keith D (talk) 23:34, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
That's quite a problem. Eric Corbett 01:05, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

32em[edit]

No longer needed in the reflist template as it now autosizes. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:30, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

But it doesn't autosize soon enough. Eric Corbett 01:43, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Eric Corbett. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Stimson Trek.png[edit]

Isn't this non-free image replaceable? Ok, there's not many of these out there in the world (this advert from September shows ~10 left), but they're out there. If none still existed, I could see it. But, if they're still out there? --Hammersoft (talk) 16:44, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Find one and take a picture then. Eric Corbett 17:37, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
  • If I had access to one, I would. WP:NFCC #1 doesn't permit us to use a non-free image until one is found. It asks whether it could be created. It can. So, I think the image fails. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
    Well, I think you're mistaken, and frankly I find all of this hand-wringing about the copright status of images to be more than a little boring. And anyway, where's the evidence that there are 10 survivors? That advert you link to doesn't even get the production date correct. Eric Corbett 17:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Eric, please, I'm not trying to be hostile here. If I were, I would have just immediately tagged the image for deletion right off and given you the copy/paste notice it was up for deletion. I was trying to be polite by coming here and discussing it with you. The reality here is the image should be deleted. Copies of the car still exist, which is proven by the advertisement from September (and it's not the only ad out there), just two months ago. There's plenty of other photos out there of this vehicle, and as long as they exist Wikipedia isn't going to accept a non-free image of the vehicle. I was hoping to give you the opportunity to have it deleted yourself, as you're an experienced editor and once I noted their existence it shouldn't have been an issue. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:03, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
  • The reality here is that you're talking out of your arse, and I wish you'd go and do it elsewhere. Eric Corbett 18:19, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Hammersoft brought to to WT:NFC, and I have to agree with him, he's right that this is very much likely replaceable with a free image, since I can search google and see people within the last few years talking about seeing one of these vehicles. NFCC#1 does not require a free image to be available, but that there is the potential for a free image, even if there is some burden on trying to get that free image. The burden is up to you, the user of non-free, to justify that it is impossible to get such a picture. --MASEM (t) 19:03, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
  • OK, delete the fucking image then, along with the article it appears in. Eric Corbett 19:12, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Your signature[edit]

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change

--[[User:Masem|M<font size="-3">ASEM</font>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) : --MASEM (t)

to

--[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size: x-small">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) : --MASEM (t)

(Sorry! This message was intended for another user. I've made plenty of mistakes before, but not this one! —Anomalocaris (talk) 20:49, 6 December 2017 (UTC))

Respectfully, Anomalocaris (talk) 19:19, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Is it "Try and Wind Up Eric" day? Eric Corbett 19:22, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
More like "Extremely Bad Luck Day", so it seems to me. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:06, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Since there are currently over 9 million instances of this "error" on English Wikipedia alone and the internet is not about to stop recognizing the "font" attribute any time soon, I wouldn't lose any sleep, although since it won't cost anything to fix it won't do any harm to change your signature. You're not being singled out - Anomalocaris is spamming this particular message on pretty much every talkpage you look at (although in most cases they at least make the effort to suggest a revised formatting so all you need to do is cut and paste it into your preferences). ‑ Iridescent 20:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
But I don't see the HTML that Masem is complaining about in my signature. Eric Corbett 20:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
No, no more do I. Anomalocaris, would you mind explaining what's going on here? Accusing people of disruption without evidence is disruptive editing in its own right (Misrepresentation of other people, if you want chapter-and-verse); is this a one-off blip or are there other instances of you dishing out warnings to people for something they haven't done? ‑ Iridescent 20:53, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Do we actually have policy that labels the use of even the most garish signatures as "disruptive"? I find it hard that someone would spend significant amounts of their free time thinking about something so trivial. ceranthor 20:59, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
How bored can someone be with the project when they take to character counting someone's signature, and then arguing about it, whilst there are millions of articles in need of improvement. CassiantoTalk 21:10, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
FWIW, when printing out Eric's signature it does not show any obsolete HTML error. Also, it's apparently some cleanup project for a future MediaWiki change if my understanding is right. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:02, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

  • Eric Corbett: Sorry. The intended recipient of the post had recently posted to your talk page, and I carelessly skipped the step of switching to that user's talk page before posting my message. I have made plenty of mistakes, but this is the first time for this one.
  • Jo-Jo Eumerus: I'll try not to bring any more bad luck.
  • Iridescent: For explanation, see message to Eric Corbett. I didn't accuse anyone of disruption. As far as I know, it is a one-off blip.
  • Ceranthor: I never called anybody's signature garish or disruptive.
  • Cassianto: I've used software tools to count characters since 1983. Computers are good at that. I didn't argue with Tony1; we worked together, along with  SMcCandlish, to solve a problem. People can accomplish a lot when they cooperate. To quote from the inaugural address of John F. Kennedy, "United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do...."
  • Jo-Jo Eumerus: You are correct; Eric Corbett's signature is lint-free; my original posting was intended for another user. You are also correct that this is part of a cleanup project.

Sorry for the disruption. Peace! —Anomalocaris (talk) 21:35, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough - everyone makes mistakes ‑ Iridescent 21:59, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
For what it's worth, while fixing up obsolete HTML is low-priority, it's not pointless. We'll want the future HTML5 Wikipedia to validate as HTML5 and for third-party tools to work with its contents without problems. Getting rid of HTML3 and HTML4 stuff that's been obsolete since the 1990s is part of the maintenance process to get us there, even if it's tedious and not something that the less geeky care about.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  23:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Stimson Trek.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Stimson Trek.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:52, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 25[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 25, October – November 2017

  • OAWiki & #1Lib1Ref
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: Research libraries and Wikimedia
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic, Korean and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)