User talk:Rlandmann/archive6

User:24.9.10.235

Hi! My IP is 24.9.10.235 and I at this time do not wish to set-up a Wikipedia account, but I do have some questions for you. Some time ago you noticed that I like to go into aircraft wiki articles and expand and improve them, and you suggested that I partake in the WikiAircraft Project. However, I am confused - is this a new WikiWiki site or is it merely a project to better expand and improve the articles present here in Wikipedia?

Romath

I left a note for you on the VfD page. I see that you're probably fully engaged in editing aircraft-related articles. And a good job too. However, if you're willing to edit Romath I'd support your edits. I'd never heard of this person until she started complaining here, but she does seem to be one of the major Usenet kooks, who receives many thousands of Google hits. Her primary complaint about the article seems to be the inclusion of her real name. If we could get a comprehensive (albeit concise) article then I wouldn't mind leaving out her name (even though it is a basic biographical detail) if it led to editing peace. Cheers, -Willmcw July 7, 2005 08:50 (UTC)

Ca.60

Nuke the page.

Thanks for the comments. Learning the various formating concepts has been slow for me, but I'm learning. Yes, when I noticed all the 'red' aircraft entries I could see there a lot to add. Fortunately I have a few old books that were useful, particularly the little book by Green on US fighters from World War II. The british were very go on putting such references together. I sort of sloft off the conversion in order to did in teh text. Little just have to spend a little more time on it!!

But, thanks again for the comments. They at least alert me to improve. It took me a little while, but I did pick on the _NOTOC_ after I saaw it on a few of my inputs. I do like it.

Wsk

Category:Military reconnaissance aircraft by nationality

If the category should not exist, please send it to CfD. Just removing the parent categories bounces it over to Category:Orphaned_categories. --Tabor 20:25, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Walter Dornberger.jpg

Image deletion warning

The image Image:Walter Dornberger.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go to its page to provide the necessary information.

RedWolf 19:06, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Template flexibility

copied from User talk:Lommer

Hey Lommer - just curious about your comment about the flexibility of templates. What concerns do you have? Check out User David Newton's amazing work on the WikiProject Ship template. I now realise that we wouldn't need the dozen different templates I originally thought we would - we'd just need two (one metric-first, one non-metric first). Switching optional fields on and off (or swtiching a template between "Wingspan" and "Main rotor diameter") is a cinch, done the way he's done it. Rlandmann 01:07, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Which ship template are you referring to? I was looking around but I didn't see one that obviously paralelled our aircraft specs table (the two articles mentioned on their project page, the ARA General Belgrano + Cutty Sark, use text based specs). Can you give me a specific link? -Lommer | ^talk 01:24, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The template is here, but it's hard to get your head around until you work out what David's done. To see it in action, look at USS Nimitz (CVN-68), then at very different types of ships like RFA Wave Ruler (A390) and HMS Trafalgar (S107) rendered with the same template! --Rlandmann 01:30, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

parametrized templates with subtemplates

I think I've figured out how the ship one was constructed - I'm going to work on an inline (bottom of page) format using this that should work for military, civilian, jet, prop, etc. I'll let you know how it goes (it's going to be at Template:Airtemp-test). -eric ✈ 04:42, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

yikes, wikimedia error. my bad.

-After some work, it appears that it's only possible to nest templates one level deep. This could make inline parameter-based templates difficult at best if true. -eric ✈ 05:06, 18 July 2005 (UTC)-[reply]

As this running dialogue with myself develops, it turns out I can pass variables through to further templates. This is opening up a lot of possibilities! -eric ✈ 05:25, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've got it working - and there's only a need for a single initial template. We can sort the rest from there, using 'starter' statements like David did. I've got two examples so far, both fixed wing (rotary can come next) - the metric-first military jet Eurofighter Typhoon and the imperial-first civilian prop Beech Bonanza. Take a look at the template details and we can figure out what to work in where. -eric ✈ 06:28, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just spotted a potential issue - the quick [edit] links that wikipedia places will take users directly to the templates, rather than the article itself. A quick way around it would be to remove the aircraft's name in the Specifications (Model) area from the template, allowing that Edit link to go to the specs section.

Also, I'll do some mockup work with infobox alternatives. -eric ✈ 06:39, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of the survey results (and ignoring my dread of yet another standards change), we should actually be able to combine some existing templates with the specifications. Both the related links section - development, designation series, etc - and the standard footer could be easily added (to a bottom specs section), and the designation series could be done as an included set of parameters. I know I often leave those out because they're forgotten or I can't get information at the time, so perhaps placing all of the 'bottom' content in once spot could streamline things. Also, if infobox is chosen, I would be willing to support a minimalist bottom-located full-width infobox. -eric ✈ 03:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just swapped the template over to require units for both types that are passed through, eliminating a 'metric first' or 'metric second' set of subtemplates. This also will allow for a third unit to be used. for example, Cruise speed: 105 knots (121 mph, 194 km/h) would be passed to the template as:

|cruise main=105 knots
|cruise alt=121 mph, 194 km/h

This simplifies matters a lot - especially for the occasional need for a third unit - although it will make changing primary units harder. Rather than changing "metric first=yes" to "metric first=no", an editor will need to swap the specifications from main to alt. Anyway, this is where I'm at so far. I'm thinking the best bet is to have a separate helicopter template, but adding a mixmaster (hybrid) subtemplate in addition to the jet/not-jet subtemplates will be an easy change. -eric ✈ 03:40, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

a cleaner infobox

I've been sketching some stuff out and thinking about it, and even if the infobox became less hideous I don't think I could ever endorse it. It simply has too many accessibility and page layout issues for me to ever really accept it as a valid method. If the vote goes the way of the infobox again, which seems entirely likely right now, I think that I'd probably just stop including specifications in new articles. -eric ✈ 19:37, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft

WikiProject Aircraft

Hi Rlandmann, just a quick note to say I've added my name to the participants list, you welcomed me way back when I first contributed (as H1523702). Let me know if there's anything in particular I can help you with. Cheers Mark 11:30, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

More human was what I was going for, though not very imaginative! I think "wade" was the right choice of word, but I'll try my best. Mark 19:44, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Abbreviation for knots

Hi,

You may wish to look at the discussion about the abbreviation for 'knot'. Thanks. Bobblewik 15:47, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

UH-60

Your page move lacked consensus (see talk page) and broke several redirects (made double redirects) which you didn't fix. I'm reverting your change. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:49, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I'll rollback my changes if you agree to go fix the double redirects and leave a note on the Talk page. :) --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:20, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

World Community Grid

Hello, before you read on I would just like to say that I have so far only posted this to a limited amount of administrators for consultation. If you have any objections to its wider distribution or suitability for Wikipedia please let me know.

Hi, I would just like to invite you to find out about the World Community Grid Human Proteome Folding Project. This is a purely philanthropic project and supported by a "blue chip" corporation in IBM. There is an ability to join a team once you have downloaded the software and another user has already established the Wikipedia team.

I would like to emphasise that I do not want to pressure anybody into feeling obligated and I understand the limited computer resources/access available to some. Feel free to pass this message on and thank you very much for your time, Mark83 21:49, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Significant objections have been raised to this. Mark83 10:34, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

British Bomber cats

The categories you have made for the bombers seem odd to me. While "chronologically" correct, it would seem to me that it would be much better organized into Interbellum, World War II and Post-war types. The overlap of these groupings is very limited, I think only the Whitley really falls into two, the Lincoln was arguably a WWII type and most others strictly pre-war.

Any arguments against a change?

Maury 13:01, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Xiong and a discussion about templates

As you may be aware, Xiong has recently recommended a discussion about the specs templates we are planning to implement. You may be interested in joining the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft/Template. Ingoolemo ^talk 18:30, 2005 August 19 (UTC)

alt.romath

I wanted to inform you that I wrote a stub article located at alt.romath. Any help expanding, researching and improving it would be appreciated - I believe you may have been around at the time. Hipocrite 21:00, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:RAFBE2.jpg

Rlandmann/archive6 — In case you aren't aware, there has been a significant change in policy. Images that do not have proper copyright information may be deleted within 7 days of uploading. I am bringing this to your attention, because you have uploaded an image, Image:RAFBE2.jpg, which does not have any copyright information. If you do not insert any copyright information within the next few days, this image may be deleted. If you have any questions on how to insert this information, please visit my talk page. Ral 315 21:55, 17 September 2005 (UTC) Ral 315 23:06, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image source/licensing for Image:Bmw-003.jpg

The image you uploaded, Image:Bmw-003.jpg, has no no source information. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, ie in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. Unless the copyright status is provided, the image will be marked for deletion on 24 October 2005.

This message notification has been automatically sent by NotificationBot managed and run by AllyUnion. Please leave comments regarding bot operations at AllyUnion's talk page. Please direct all comments regarding licensing information at Wikipedia talk:Images for deletion. --NotificationBot 12:34, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Patsayev.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Patsayev.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or {{fairuse}}. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by going to "Your contributions" from your user page and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Pak21 11:13, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ship table

I thought you might be interested to know that I have reformulated the ship table after I was made aware of an important advance in template syntax: someone has programmed IF capability into the language. I had essentially implemented that to do what I wanted to do with the template, but the way that I had done it was rather clumsy and somewhat of a kludge. The template is now much more elegant from a code point of view, and it is also much easier to follow what is going on with it when entering data. The functionality is essentially unaffected.

The IF capability in the template indeed means that, as I read it, it is actually easier to add things if we suddenly discover that something else is needed in the template. The reason for that is that the IF notation means that adding new functionality will not break the existing tables so far as I can see. Therefore we should not have to go round to all the tables that are already in place to alter them and add a new row. We simply add the code to the main template and then add the enabling code to the individual tables as needed. It's a further maintenance advantage of the new table over the old dispersed way of doing things. David Newton 20:57, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I've tested whether adding new functionality is possible without breaking existing tables, and the answer is that it can be done. David Newton 21:16, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Shonin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Shonin.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or {{fairuse}}. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --SCEhard T 04:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem RE: Image:Hellmuth Hirth.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hellmuth Hirth.jpg. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law. We need you to specify two things on the image description page:

The copyright holder, and
The copyright status

The copyright holder is usually the creator. If the creator was paid to make this image, then their employer may be the copyright holder. If several people collaborated, then there may be more than one copyright holder. If you created this image, then you are the copyright holder.

Because of the large number of images on Wikipedia, we've sorted them using image copyright tags. Just find the right tag corresponding to the copyright status of this image, and paste it onto the image description page like this: {{TAGHERE}}.

There are 3 basic ways to licence an image on Wikipedia:

The copyright holder gets the best protection of their work by licencing it under an open content license such as the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike licence. If you have the express permission of the copyright holder to licence their work under the above licence, use the image copyright tag: {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}. The GNU Free Documentation License is another option. Again, if you have the express permission of the copyright holder, use the tag {{GFDL}}.

The copyright holder can also release their work into the public domain. See here for examples.

Images from certain sources are automatically released into the public domain. This is true for the United States, where the Wikimedia servers are located. (See here for images from the government of the USA and here for other governments.) However, not all governments release their work into the public domain. One exception is the UK (see here for images from the UK government). Non-free licence governments are listed here.

Also, in some cases, an image is copyrighted but allowed on Wikipedia because of fair use. To see a) if this image qualifies, and b) if so, how to tag it, see Wikipedia:Fair use.

For more information, see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. Please remember that untagged images are likely to be deleted.

If you have uploaded other images without including copyright tags, please go back and tag them. Also, please tag all images that you upload in the future.

If you have any questions, just leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again. --Pak21 13:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Timeline of aviation

I notice you created Category:Timeline of aviation, which contains articles whose titles begin with a year. If you have time, could you please go through and make sure the articles are sorted in their respective year (or year-in) parent categories using sortkeys as outlined at Wikipedia:Categorization#Year categories? (Don't forget to start the sortkey with a capital letter.) If you've done this already, thanks and sorry for bugging you about this. I plan to go through a ton of such pages early next year; it would be nice if some of the work were already done... - dcljr (talk) 01:29, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DFS-194

I am preparing an article on DFS-194 aircraft and would like to know if you could share your references while you used on writing the DFS-194 section in Wikipedia.

My email address is: atrastella@hotmail.com

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Yours sincerely Turhan Gungor

Naming conventions for television shows (again)

I saw that you were active in the first vote for naming conventions of television program(mes). Well it has raised it's ugly head again and I would appreciate any comments you have to make about my new proposal for naming television shows. Please leave comments here. Thanks! --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 21:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Klaus_Riedel.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Klaus_Riedel.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you. -- Carnildo 08:35, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Couple of dumb questions - 1. if I write a new page for an aircraft, do you want me to add it to the List of New Aircraft. 2. I can't find an article about the Airco / de Havilland DH4 anywhere on Wiipedia, can't believe we've missed such an important type - is my searching way off? Happy to write the article, but wanted to check with a Wiki expert first :-). Winstonwolfe 01:00, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page name for temperature articles

To avoid flip-flopping between 'degree Fahrenheit' and 'Fahrenheit' or 'degree Celsius' and 'Celsius', I propose that we have a discussion on which we want. I see you have contributed on units of measurement, please express your opinion at Talk:Units of measurement. Thanks. bobblewik 22:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Ernst_Udet.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ernst_Udet.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 09:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Gerhard_Fieseler.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gerhard_Fieseler.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Image legality questions. 13:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Julius_Hatry.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Julius_Hatry.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Image legality questions. 08:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

There is a consensus discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft#Infobox Aicraft consensus discussion on adopting a non-specifications summary infobox for aircraft articles. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks! - Emt147 ^Burninate! 18:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canadair CL215

I created this article some time back. You moved it (also some time ago - I don't know why it did not show on my watchlist) to Canadair CL-215, but it appears as though you cut-and-pasted it, because the history of my creation did not follow. I note you have been a Wikipedian for some time, so you doubtless know that cut-and-paste edits do not preserve the history of an article. I am passing this along in the event you are not aware. No hard feelings. D e nni ☯ 02:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ACA Industries

In case you hadn't noticed, ACA Industries has been proposed for deletion. NickelShoe (Talk) 17:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Aeritalia_G91.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aeritalia_G91.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:42, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Aermacchi_MB339.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aermacchi_MB339.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Alenia_G222.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alenia_G222.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Caproni_Ca3.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Caproni_Ca3.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:BachemBa349.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:BachemBa349.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Liftarn 13:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Belyayev.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Belyayev.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 16:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto with Image:Bykovsky.jpg. --Sherool (talk) 09:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know

On 15 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Explorer 32, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howch e ng {chat} 16:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Nikolayev.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Nikolayev.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Lupo 12:26, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Dobrovolsky.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dobrovolsky.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:48, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ABS Aircraft

Dear Rlandmann, today my friend Dr. K. Theile made me aware about the Wiki entry you seem to have created on ABS Aircraft AG. You state: " ABS Aircraft AG is a Swiss aircraft manufacturer, building Fournier-designed motorgliders. It was founded in Küsnacht in 1985 by Dr K Theile."

Nothing, except the name of the company, is correct. Dr. K. Theile has nothing to do with ABS Aircraft AG and has nothing to do with anything that is related to Aircraft or the Aircraft industry. I do not know what made you put his name on the Internet. ABS Aircraft AG was not founded in Küsnacht, it is registerd in Küsnacht. ABS Aircraft AG once owned the rights of a single Motorglider model designed by Rene Fournier, known as the RF-9 which ABS Aircraft AG sold to a Polish company some years ago who now modernise and commercialise the RF-9.

I would kindly ask you to delete this entire entry on ABS Aircraft AG.

Best regards

Dipl.-Ing. Klaus Blum Director and owner ABS Aircraft AG, Küsnacht

Unspecified source for Image:Volkov.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Volkov.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may 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. —An gr 13:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Khrunov.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Khrunov.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. cohesion 17:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Komarov.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Komarov.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. cohesion 17:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Beregovoi.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Beregovoi.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Ju287.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ju287.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Liftarn 09:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]