User talk:Melesse/Archive 14

Mount_Carmel_(Varroville)_Emblem.gif

Thanks for yo' help, :)! Capt. Mozart (talk) 05:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

(Image:1602-benefit.png)

Hi, Thank you for your message. can you please check out the above image..i've included it. is the copyright sufficient (as fair use) Seektrue (talk) 21:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Orphaned Image at Image:Label Fandango.PNG

Hey Melesse, just to say thank you for the comment on the page, I know the image is orphaned. I uploaded the image of the record label prior to the label's wiki page being created, which I am in the process of doing now. Probably should have created the article then the image, but oh well.

Once the article has went live, is it ok to delete the speedy from the image?

Thanks for your help, ^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 02:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, when you make the actual article then you can remove the tag. And in the future, please make the article first. Melesse (talk) 06:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Rationales :)

Thanks - Don't forget to strike throught the bot/warning message on the relveant uploaders talk pages. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:KarinYuzu.jpg

Please restore the image you (just) deleted. While your deletion was justified by policy, the image was apparently uploaded by an inactive editor, and none of us who actively edit the topic found out it was in danger of being deleted until about 2 minutes ago when a bot informed us after the fact. Seeing as the image was serving a useful and appropriate purpose in an article, being a group image illustrating a character list, the rationale can be fixed up easily enough. Thank you. --erachima talk 05:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

No. The image does not add anything significant to the article (there's nothing noted about either character's looks that requires a picture reference). Melesse (talk) 09:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Fine, doesn't particularly matter. Was mostly just annoyed at the lack of prior notification. --erachima talk 00:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Please don't just disregard this, I would like a response - My Image Submissions to which you deleted.

Hello

I have a couple of questions regarding some Images I added to Wikipedia to which you deleted.

1. Leeds United 1969-70.jpg

I added this image as it is the only way of obtaining a full line-up of the first Leeds United squad to win an English Football Championship. Several of the members of this squad are now deceased thus making it impossible to collect together all of the players in the squad for a free picture. As far as I am aware Wikipedia's policy is to allow pictures in this situation as there is no way of taking a free picture of deceased people.

2. 38193116 leedshaaalkeane300.jpg

I added this image as it was an important part in the football careers of Alfie Haaland and Roy Keane as well as the Rivalry between Leeds United and Manchester united. This picture cannot be re-created as it is of a notable point in history. Similar images such as Scotland Wembley 1977.jpg are used on wikipedia for similar purposes yet the NFMR for these are allowed.

Could you explain what was wrong regarding these images and why given my reasons above they still should have been deleted. The reason I did not respond when they were nominated for deletion was that I was on holiday and I have only just got round to raising this issue with yourself.

Regards

Chappy^T_C 19:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair use images are held to very strict criteria, one of them being that an image must provide information that cannot be easily presented any other way. In the case of both those pictures, text can easily describe what players were on a team or participated in a game. Melesse (talk) 22:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

E8 graph.svg file deletion

I think there was a mistake on the deletion of [1] this. It says there was a duplicate upload, but the original is now gone (which has links from over a dozen WP pages). I am sure that was a mistake (as the original is set in the context of many other similar diagrams). The date seems to be wrong as I can't find reference to it from your edits July 27 (and it just recently was deleted). Jgmoxness (talk) 17:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The image is located on Commons here. Melesse (talk) 00:01, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Village People page photos

Hello,

A while back you worked on the photo of the album cover of Village People Greatest Hits re-mix. I was wondering if you could make that the first photo, as it has the original membersa and is a better photo than the first photo (which is a not-so-hot shot of the replacements in 2006). I originally uploaded the Remix photo, but I can't do the switch, I keep messing up ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 03:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:COME BACK TO ME CD.jpg

You deleted Image:COME BACK TO ME CD.jpg with the CSD claim that it was a duplicate. Since it's a hoax cover, I'd like to find the image you think its a duplicate of so that I can have it deleted too.—Kww(talk) 12:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vanessa_hudgens-come_back_to_me_s.jpg Melesse (talk) 23:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Da_Vinci_S_HD_System.jpg

User:Melesse deleted on Oct 1 an image I uploaded to the da Vinci Surgical System entry page. I don't understand why I can't post the image of the da Vinci S System on the da Vinci Surgical System page. The image I replaced was an outdated image of an older model of da Vinci. This specific image is available at the manufacturer's website, in the online image gallery, and permissions are openly granted on this page for use in promotional and editorial context. Furthermore, I actually work for the manufacturer, Intuitive Surgical, and am personally responsible for granting rights for image usage to third parties requesting for promotional or editorial use. If anybody has authority to use post this image to this Wikipedia page, I think it is me. How can I get the image back up on the Wikipedia page? I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, so I do appreciate any help! User:Nojudi —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC).

Love Unlimited

i thought album covers were allowed... all i did was crop the album cover to use on the main page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubfan789 (talk • contribs) 08:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Only for to illustrate the actual album, not the band that might be on the cover of it. Melesse (talk) 08:16, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:'Stormtroops Advancing Under Gas', etching and aquatint by Otto Dix, 1924.jpg

I've reverted this to the previous image. The one you uploaded obscures all the details of the work and hence misrepresents the original, failing to show to the reader some of the reason that makes this image necessary. You have made no argument on the talk page as to why the small version is preferable. I think these 300 pixel max dimension reductions are too small for most images. I find 400 pixels are usually necessary, sometimes larger. I suspect 400 would probably not work with this image, as it has some fine detail which needs to be retained to keep faith with the artist's intention. Maybe 500 would keep the detail? We need to minimise the size of images, while still making sure they can be seen properly. You might like to join in the discussion on [[2]] regarding visual art images. Ty 13:51, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Rothko and other images

Re. this Rothko painting, you have added a deletion template, [3], stating it is "a subject for which a free image might reasonably be found or created that adequately provides the same information". Did you mean to refer to the original larger image or the original and the new image, which is what the template now applies to? Is this in error? If not, then you need to explain how a free image can be found or created. As Rothko's work is unique to him and in copyright, it is difficult to see how this can be done. If it is in error, please remove the wrong tags from images where you have uploaded them. Ty 17:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

It was not an error. It's justified for fair use on Mark Rothko's article, but not in any of the others it's used in (History of painting, Abstract expressionism, Color Field, Western painting). Melesse (talk) 01:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

If it's justified in the Mark Rothko article, then it shouldn't be deleted, so the tag is in error. What you need to do is dispute fair use on the other articles, not delete the image. See Wikipedia:Non-free content review. Ty 02:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)