User talk:Modal1

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia! Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Greg Buhr, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. ʄlame 03:57, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:TheManvils2010a.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TheManvils2010a.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 17:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:TheManvils2010a.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:TheManvils2010a.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 02:31, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I give up!

I was asked by both SchmuckyTheCat and After Midnight to explain/justify the copyright/fair use status of File:TheManvils2010a.jpg, which I had already explained upon uploading the file.

So I added a more detailed and legitimate explanation on the file discussion page, as asked, with some questions regarding just how one is to actually prove ownership of the uploaded picture (and even that they are who they say they are - how do they determine this on the internet??), to which no-one responded, and then someone else, going by the name Explicit, simply deleted the file using what appears to be some automated script, seemingly without any consensus or further explanation, or if there was I cannot view it because NawlinWiki deleted the talk page as well. I did find the following though:
Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_August_31#File:TheManvils2010a.jpg

So why would this file then be deleted?

Modal1 (talk) 21:17, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:TheManvils2010a.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:TheManvils2010a.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Speedy deletion

Thanks for responding. This doesn't explain why the file was deleted by User:Explicit in the first place as per the following decision: "The result of the discussion was: Keep, file is tagged as non-free. User:After_Midnight 02:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)" Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_August_31#File:TheManvils2010a.jpg[reply]

Modal1 (talk) 20:37, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The image was not deleted because of the discussion, which closed as keep on September 12. It was deleted on September 20 because it lacked a fair use rationale, that is, an explanation of why Wikipedia should be allowed to use a non-free image.

I'll restore the image if you'll add a fair use rationale (you can use {{fair use rationale}}). — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:21, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I thought the original discussion and decision was regarding the fair use rationale? I had already remarked upon uploading that the image was non-free and that it was paid for by The Manvils for promotional purposes and created by Mark Maryanovich and was a low resolution copy of the original. I included a copyright notice as well. What else do I need to include for it to be acceptable on wikipedia?

Modal1 (talk) 22:29, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The version on September 12 (the one that was kept per the original discussion) had licensing information but no fair use rationale. I'll go ahead and restore the image. Please add {{fair use rationale}} to the page. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the requested info. Thanks very much for your help!

Modal1 (talk) 01:36, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:TheManvils2010a.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:TheManvils2010a.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 06:16, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just go ahead and delete the file and page as I am sick of spending hours upon days trying to justify the use of a simple jpeg to you people who obviously can't be bothered to read each others previous posts and decisions. This is ridiculous!

Modal1 (talk) 18:25, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've read the previous posts and decisions. The photo has copyright information and a fair-use rationale, which were the previous issues, but apparently up to this point no one has pointed out that the image could potentially be replaced by a freely licensed image, which means that it fails the first non-free content criterion. This is a different issue from that mentioned in previous posts, although the notice may appear similar. —Bkell (talk) 03:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. Perhaps one of the regular wikipedia contributors can locate a potentially freely licensed image of The Manvils (I think if someone located a freely licensed image and wanted to replace the licensed one..this would all make some sense. Sort of...) to add to the page as I've now been exhausted by this lengthy process and will not likely be contributing any further - I first uploaded the image in question over two months ago!

It would be good to see some serious clarification for the lay person upon uploading an image. For example, if the uploader states that it is a copyright image, in order to continue processing the upload a declaration from the copyright holder must be included or the image does not get posted. Just an idea that would have saved me many hours and days of confusion and frustration.

I was only just informed about the copyright holders declaration requirement today by Magog the Ogre on [[1]] where I was originally directed to respond to the questions concerning the file I uploaded and posted a response and some questions on September 2nd, 2010, to which no one responded to until today, October 28th, 2010 - and as a result I received my first email notification regarding the matter as well as a result of that post, long after the originally uploaded image had been deleted. I was on tour with my band (The Manvils) when the first deletion occurred and received no email notices from responses on my talk page but not sure if this is something I needed to enable or if the responder sent me a private email.

Sorry to say, but there are far too many variables here, you need a Wikidegree just to wade through all the acronyms and wikipedia-specific terms. CAN....NOT....CONTINUE.... Kirk out.

Thanks and Best Regards, Modal1 (talk) 19:14, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your frustration. The non-free content policy is by a wide margin the most confusing and complicated policy on Wikipedia. —Bkell (talk) 19:17, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TheManvils2010a.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TheManvils2010a.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:38, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Modal1. You have new messages at File talk:TheManvils2010a.jpg.
Message added 05:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]