User talk:Oniscoid

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

License tagging for File:Laurindo almeida with salli terri 1959.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Laurindo almeida with salli terri 1959.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:06, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

done Oniscoid (talk) 02:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Tex Beneke[edit]

TO Oniscoid: you mentioned that the Tex Beneke photo in the Library of Congress is misidentified. Right behind Tex Beneke's ass in the photo, is his chart stand with his name lettered on it: TEX BENEKE. It's barely visibile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.122.250.250 (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

there are two identical photos of Tex Beneke on different pages of the Library of Congress Gottlieb archive -- one is captioned "Tex Beneke"; the other (which my link pointed to) is captioned (immediately above the pic) "Laurindo Almeida" -- the photo of Tex Beneke captioned Laurindo Almeida is misidentified -- <sigh> -- Oniscoid (talk) 23:53, 23 September 2010 (UTC) -- re-edited Oniscoid (talk) 12:39, 24 September 2010 (UTC) -- re-edited Oniscoid (talk) 02:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC) -- Oniscoid (talk) 14:25, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Laurindo almeida with salli terri 1959.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Laurindo almeida with salli terri 1959.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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

the scan of this photo is in the public domain -- its copyright status may be unclear to others, in which case i apologise, but it is not in dispute -- for more details please see my comment of 6th Dec 2010 on the discussion page -- Oniscoid (talk) 14:25, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Silk Road (marketplace)[edit]

Hi. Regarding your revert of my edits to Silk Road (marketplace), which you did under the rationale that the link to the organization's website is "link spam", you should be aware that it is standard practice in Wikipedia articles on organizations to have a link to the organization's official site, both in the Infobox and at the top of the External links section, as such links are considered by the editing community to be relevant additions to the article. The editing community does not consider them to be link spam.

Also, you reverted not only the addition of that link, but my copyediting of the ABC Action News report in the same section. Do you have a rationale for this? If you disagree with a portion of another editor's edits, nad have a valid rationale for its removal, then you should remove only that portion, and not do a blind, or blanket edit of all the edits, including the beneficial ones, since that could be construed as disruptive or tendentious editing.

If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 21:57, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

you are linking to the wrong site -- silkroad.com is nothing to do with Silk Road Marketplace, the subject of the article -- did you look at the Article? did you look at the page you linked to? - Oniscoid 22:34, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I went to the website before I went to the Wikipedia article, and therefore, did not compare the logos. Thanks for pointing that out. But why did you also revert the link formatting of the YouTube video? Nightscream (talk) 23:06, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
thanks for replying -- sorry, my bad -- i didn't notice your YouTube video link edit at the time -- there have been several similar attempts to vandalise the Silk Road URL in the last few days and i presumed this was yet another - Oniscoid 23:24, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Added Silk Road benefits and references[edit]

I moved the sentence you had deleted to a new section, Benefits, and added references. I hope this is now satisfactory.deisenbe (talk) 11:03, 19 August 2014 (UTC)