User talk:Stan Shebs/archive 10

Stamps

This image is in the public domain because it was released by the copyright holder Deutsche Post der DDR (between: 1945 - 1990). These stamp is published by the Deutschen Post der DDR (German Post of the GDR) or the sowjet occupying power. At the 3rd October 1990, the Deutsche Bundespost (German federal post) became to a legal successor. This is according to § 5; paragraph. 1 of the German copyright-law an officially stamp "(amtliches Werk)". According to the German copyright-law is this consequently public domain "(gemeinfrei)".

May I use this? User:Nadia Kittel

Image:Oldmansea fuentes.jpg

I posted the source and qualified the fair use tags. A quick google search will show that nearly all of the available images of Fuentes anywhere are from one shoot he did in front of a painting of Hem. So this is about as free as it gets, plus the image isn't that big. Cheers. --DanielNuyu 09:37, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tamarillofruit.jpg

I have no idea where I got this picture from, so feel free to trash it. Cheers, Peter1968 17:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

image tags

Thanks for bringing the issue of the tag for the takahe image to my attention. I was boneheaded in not making it clear I released it with a GDFL tag. I have now. Sorry for the inconvinience. Sabine's Sunbird 19:37, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

SPEEDY DELETION

Hi Stan: All the pictures that you discovered in Samuel Cashwan were taken by me. However, I am not the swiftest fellow around computers and will try and figure out how to add a proper copyright tag. {{GFDL}}, i think, is what i use. I have a fair number of pictures around wikipedia and almost all are ones that I've taken, so if you find any others, send 'em on over. Carptrash 05:03, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Schneyer.jpg

Regarding the Helen Bonchek Schneyer image, I would recommend deleting it since I cannot find the original image and thus am unable to give it a correct copyright tag. I must apologize for the image and say that at the time I uploaded it I had had little experience with Wikipedia's copyright procedure and since uploading it, I had completely forgotten about it. Best Regards, Deyyaz ^{[ Talk | Contribs ]} 15:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tallinn_&_Helsinki_046_-_Tallinn_Town_Hall.jpeg

Hi Stan. I noticed you put a no-license-tag on that image on my "Watch List". I would have preferred to having been notified about that by you, but it doesn't matter. I just wanted to point out that that picture was made by myself in November 2004 during a trip to Tallinn. What do I have to do to get rid of the tag? Thanks, and greetings. Luis rib 16:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I noticed you also put a tag on the following picture: Image:Rotterdam_16.03.05_fortis.jpg. Same comments as above. Picture was made by myself during a trip to rotterdam im March 2005. Luis rib 16:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Thx for the help. It's true I haven't been active in a while...work keeps me pretty busy. Luckily I decided to check before the pics got deleted. I promise to put the license tag on the pictures I uplopad in the future. Luis rib 18:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Ascension Island

Postage history is rather detailed for the main page for Ascension Island, so I originally moved a cut down version to the Economy section as appropiate. I am sorry you think I have cut out too much, so I have moved your history section to Postage stamps of Ascension Island, which can focus more directly on the topic. Hopefully this will allow a more comprehensive section on postage to be built up, and a linked summary in the main article.

I would not consider my actions to be vandalism. All my actions are efforts to improve the page, and I welcome your feedback. Astrotrain 21:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

That's a good point about the images- I didn't really think about that. Astrotrain 09:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Sand Tiger Shark

Thanks for informing me, I listed it at IFD. Its not even being used now anyway, I originally uploaded it for the Tiger Shark page, after actually looking at the image, turns out it was a Sand Tiger...Lol..Anyway thanks for telling me about it. Forever young 02:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Ame.jpg

copied to your page at wikicommons. sorry. Amit A. 19:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Delete the pictures on the Sindhis page

I put those in a long time ago and didn't consider the copyright problems. Thanks. Tombseye 19:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism suspect

Hello.

I noticed you caught and reverted an edit to the National Snow and Ice Data Center article. Does the edit you reverted constitute vandalism? I'm curious.

Cheers. Folajimi 00:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)^(talk)

• Thanks for the timely response. This new-fangled vandalism could cause problems. I mean, if someone edits an article relating to say philately, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference :( Folajimi^(talk)

Re: Image copyright

I've tagged Image: Tak Tin Bus Terminus.jpg with GFDL-self. Thanks for the reminder. Deryck C. 09:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Problems

I received a message from you about an image I copied from the Goiânia article in Wikipedia Portuguese and put in the Goiânia site in English. I presume the image is ok if it is on the other site and no one has questioned it. Wouldn´t you have to get rid of the Portuguese image first? If you think the image is a problem then I will gladly remove it. Vogensen 17:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, Stan for reminding me to put tag on the Image. I have put the GFDL tag on Image:Gohad2.jpg, as it was created by me.burdak 17:37, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

taging my image

you tagged this as copyrighted, please explain. Cornell Rockey 21:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't really know what those mean, could you explain? Cornell Rockey 22:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I understand the general principles of copyrights & apropriate tagging, just not the specifics: I don't get the difference between GFDL & PD.... what did I have it flagged as? What about the images I personally took, (the ones in the gallery of my userpage) are they tagged correctly? Cornell Rockey 22:35, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, I appreciate it. Also, I see with both have some interest in WWII naval history. How random. All the best! :) Cornell Rockey 23:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

RE: User page editing.

A thousand apologies for the edit; there was no ill-intent.

From now on, I will be sure to avoid such edits... Folajimi 13:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyrights

Hi Stan. I appreciate your efforts on applying the policy re images. However, i don't fancy the template of reminding me on my talk page of the removal everytime you remove an image. I'd appreciate if you remove them w/o informing me as i'd understand that they were removed for an obvious reason. Cheers -- Szvest 16:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Stan. -- Szvest 12:13, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Hear, hear. Stan, your image removal boilerplate message may have been written with the best intentions, but as Szvest pointed out above, it is unnecessary. Moreover, it strikes a condescending tone, which—even if unintentional—does little to foster compliance on the part of those who receive your message. —Ryanaxp 12:49, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

To which stan replied on my talk page:

I didn't actually write the message text, it's part of the boilerplate for all this; you should address the author of it, or tweak it yourself. It doesn't really matter whether you feel like complying, the image is on a seven-day countdown and will disappear unless somebody intervenes to save it - the "no source" categories have been getting pretty energetically emptied out.

Regardless of whether you were the original author of said blurb, it was nonetheless you who placed the text on my talk page. As for sentence #2, who said anything about me specifically feeling like complying or not? My criticism was directed to the general effect of that ham-fisted boilerplate currently sullying my talk page, but implies nothing one way or the other regarding my particular inclinations. —Ryanaxp 15:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Stan further opined:

When it comes down to it, I don't actually care that much about the opinions of people apparently incapable of following the simple instructions on the upload page. You want to avoid the ugly notices? Try uploading correctly. Stan 16:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

To put it another way, I've spent weeks of my time cleaning up after lazy people, who (unsurprisingly perhaps) seem content to have others do their work for them. By the way, your attempted image fixup is still wrong, but I wash my hands of it, you're on your own. Stan 16:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

You "don't actually care," yet, there you were again, adding still more of your snide excoriation to my talk page. However, you are quite correct that I am lazy, Stan, and I cannot dispute that I deserve your scorn and contempt. Heap it on me, baby. —Ryanaxp 21:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Images

Many of the images that I have uploaded are from the government website managed by National Informatics Centre. [1]. I was under the impression that the tag {{PD-IndiaGov}} was the tag applicable for the images uploaded from the websites managed by Government of India. However as per the update I have got from User:Carnildo this tag is not appropriate and the Government of India holds copyright till 60 years.

So I am still trying to find a solution for this... This seems to be a issue of mis-communication where in I thought that the tag "PD-IndiaGov" was applicable for the images from Government of India... Please advise. --Aravind Parvatikar 12:44, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

It would appear that if there are Indian images that were published before 1946 then {{PD-India}} is the tag to use. However, note that even if such copyright has expired in India if it was published after 1923 in the United States and registered then it is still in copyright in the United States and thus cannot be used on Wikipedia (fair use aside). If the images have never been published in the United States then the term to think about is life of the author plus 70 years. So, if an image has been published in India prior to 1946, and never published in the United States, then the author needs to have died before 1936 for the image to be usable on Wikipedia. David Newton 18:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Images for deletion

I don't know if you are the one who are tagging images (Image:TelemarkNotoddenInfo_g.jpg) for speddy deletion for OrpanBot but trying to communicating with a student out of town, with a time limit (User:Woelne), isn't very wise. No matter how "correct" it may seem.

The image is from his home town, a village in Norway. I find it unlikely that anyone else but him has taken the photo.

— John Erling Blad (no) 08:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Arabian Sea touching the coast, Kerala .jpg

Thanks for drawing my attention to the copyright issues. Actually, it was a picture taken by me, and I will do the needful soon, and tag the image. --Bhadani 15:29, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Arecibo Image

All I did was have the images reversed/mirrored using paint shop pro like somebody had wanted in the discussion. StargateX1 20:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

WP CS

Hi Stan! Just wanted to say "welcome aboard!" to WikiProject Computer science. Looking forward to working with you! --Allan McInnes 02:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thankyou for saving my own image.... --Aravind Parvatikar 06:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: AirBlue Image copyright problem

Thanks for pointing it out, the image was taken by me, I've added the GFDL tag to it.

Images of Colm Rice

Stan, thanks for spotting those - I have gone through all my images and inserted a suitable license. Thank for your help. --Colm Rice 11:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Stan. You can delete Image:Romania Graiuri-a.jpg right away. I only made that as a proposal. I totally forgot about it. Constantzeanu 15:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Roman Bridge Image

I decided not to use that image. Delete it. I have it on my computer.Vogensen 16:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Gokdeniz image

Thanks for the warning about the image on the gokdeniz page. i did that page when i was just starting out here at wikipedia, and in all honesty i cannot remember where i got the image from so i guess it'll have to go. anyway, i'll make sure to have a look through all the other images i've uploaded as soon as my uni exams are done at the end of the week. Zbzdhbafr 19:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:ClaudiaNeidig.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ClaudiaNeidig.jpg

Looks like it can be purged (been seven days since the notice was posted). Just a reminder in case you forgot about it. :)

→ P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 00:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

definition of computer science

We seem to be coming close to a resolution, you might want to voice your opinion at Talk:Computer science#medcabal 4. Cheers, —Ruud 01:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Cruiser (warship) → Cruiser

Hello. In the interest of building a consensus, I would appreciate any input you would have regarding the request to move Cruiser (warship) back to Cruiser. Thank you, Kralizec! | talk 04:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Userbox Houston

I made a Houston userbox (at {{User Houston}}) WhisperToMe 23:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:62171.jpg

Hi. I noticed you tagged Image:62171.jpg as no source. It looks like the user blindly marked it as {{NoRightsReserved}} so I sent it to WP:CV. I'm a little new at this - does it seem like I handled this properly? Thanks. —Wknight94 (talk) 04:28, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

BTW, it looks like he did the same with several of his questionable images. I guess I need to list each one at WP:CV? —Wknight94 (talk) 04:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the confirmation! The copyright message is pretty clear at the bottom of each page so it didn't seem kosher to me. —Wknight94 (talk) 14:17, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Barrow-b36.jpg

Ah, I'd forgotten about that. I added it a while ago now when a relative newbie, so yeah, I'm afraid it probably is copyrighted and one that ought to be deleted. Apologies Robdurbar 11:16, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Barnsley Garden

This picture was removed by one of moderators off Adairsville article and instructed me this information so the picture supposed to be erased by according to the moderator. it was his fault for not removing. I am going to make a picture of Barnley Garden which few miles off Adairsville when I get a chance. I am very busy as researcher and historian for Rome Area Museum. I have not added more information to my user:Cculber007 about the job yet. Wikipedia is nonprofite organzation; however, you and moderator who removed the picture will not have the problem when I post my own picture under my right and copyright like I did to Adairsville downtown and Battle of Adairsville. I wish Wikipedia pay me profit for gas and food to complete my mission on these articles. I am not finished with Rydal, Georgia that was one iof my family. They did not mention Sonairsville, Georgia near Fairmont and Calhoun, Georgia either. The time is value and matter for working these. "Pride in Education". Talk Cculber007

Merci

Greetings from tropical French Guiana. Thanks for the welcome, Stan. I've signed into the Commons and added the photo of the lake. I know it's not the best picture in the world, but the really nice ones are on the laptop and it's not at home right now. Keep up the good work! Marialadouce 14:55, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

User:Pietras1988

I ask you for reaction to this user behaviour. This is not the first time he insults people on en:Wiki, I think a 24h block for cooling will teach him a lesson. A.J. 14:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Proofs:

• [2]
• [3] - in Polish they were right insulting yoy becoause you talk like 0.
• [4]

Just give him a warning then. I took part in RFC discussion about Pietras trolling on Polish Wiki and in my opinion it has little effect on his attitude. A.J. 14:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Århus Domkirke Picture

I have placed a GDFL tag on the page and sourced it. I do not know if this is adequate or not - please notify me if further action is required. Celcius ^(Talk) Wiki be With us! 21:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Postage stamps of India

We are intending to start a new article for current postage stamps. Postal history is intended to cover not only stamps, but things like technology, organization, etc. deeptrivia (talk) 13:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Plz delete

By all means, delete such images. As you'd notice from my userpage, i'm often toooooo lazy to do it myself :P Idleguy 06:50, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Kalanchoe

May I ask the reason why you reverted this article to a prior version? FYI PLS Cf [5] Jclerman 08:11, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I understand. No problem. Thanks for reverting. Since you are an admin, if you want to see an interesting case spanning several related articles with non-random vandalism (really directed misrepresentations and insults) I can give you the article names...;-) Jclerman 19:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Copyright on stamps images

Hello. I remember you propose to make a list of public domain stamps by country. Since I've got some users on fr.wiki who are proposing me to scan their stamps and ask me about copyrights, I propose you to open the work with a page on Commons I will create by tomorrow with the little I know (let's say : [commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Stamps/Public domain]) that can be translate for each local Wikipedia project. Have a good evening. Sebjarod 20:41, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I would remind both of you that there is a resource for most European country's stamp images at [6] so people do not duplicate work already done. I am not sure what individual country copyright issues are. ww2censor 04:59, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

For Stan, I don't have the knowledge neither the language skills to do it in English, sorry.

For ww2censor, on fr.wiki and many others Wikipedias, there is a movement against fair use and copyright images that is growing. The website you quote does not seem to give (or I miss it) under which licence he puts this pictures on line and how can we reuse them. Sebjarod 16:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I am asking europeanstamps.net for their copyright info and will let you know what they say. ww2censor 17:17, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Result of first writing there : Commons:Stamps/Public domain. I put there only countries with sources I found on Commons, en: or fr:. And here is the page I created to guide users that want to add pictures of stamps (note the vocabulary about fair-use is the result of compromises around the fair-use problems I told before. Sebjarod 17:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted

Wanted to let you know I posted a reply to your message on my Talk page. Thanks for the note! ⇒ BRossow ^T/_C 14:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Portrait bhumibol sirikit.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Portrait bhumibol sirikit.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media 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 media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, 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. Thank you. Stan 17:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for contacting me. To be honest, it's been such a while since I uploaded the image that I don't remember much about it. I think the image should be tagged under a fair use tag. I can add that to the image. --speedoflight | talk to me 06:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The image was from a web site. Unfortunately, I don't remember the site. It is fine with me if the image gets deleted. I think the major contributors to the articles that the image is linked to may have some feelings about its deletion. I did some very, very minor edits a long time ago. Sorry that I can't help much but as mentioned, it's been a long while since I made my edits to the article and since then, I've worked on so many others. --speedoflight | talk to me 16:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Did you say what I think you said?

In regard to your statement, "He added a link to the fair use project, you removed it.". To me this appears to be an appalling misrepresentation of events. Your simplification is unsupported by the facts, and I can't even fathom why you'd make it, excluding some bizarre mistake. I'd like you to retract it. --Gmaxwell

Untagged Images

Hello Stan Shebs, yaa.. i should notify the uploaders about tagged messages that it has been tagged with no source information. Could you help me how to notify an uploader? Is there any tag which i can use for notifying? Thanks -- Shyam ^(T/C) 13:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

thanks for telling about the tag. Is there any tag which we can place on Image page itself and a message goes to uploader also. If it is so, it would be very faster. What do you say. I am going to notify the uploaders. If you can help me in notifying the uploaders, i like to thank you very much. I have tagged no source on two complete pages: [[1 and [[2, wherever required. Thank you once again -- Shyam ^(T/C) 13:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

the favela's image

Hi Stan. See the explanation here about the picture. Thanks. Danny-w 19:14, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Yup

I definitely need to review my own image uploads. Will do so when I get half a moment to think! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Nadine strossen.jpg

Thanks for pointing that out to me. I don't remember the source, so I replaced the image with one directly from the ACLU, well-sourced, and tagged as a promotional photo. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 14:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

RE: Image:Balram Jakhar.jpg

Hi Stan, The Image has been taken from the URL http://www.mpinfo.org/hindi/governor/imege/balram1.jpg

I had no idea about tagging at that time so I had wrongly put the Tag-fairuse. There is no copy right tag on the media page. Therefore it shoud not be deleted. Thanks for pointing out. burdak 02:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Chico Marx image

I didn't even remember uploading it! :) 20,000 edits does that. :) I got it from nndb. Here is the link. But yeah they don't say where THEY got it from. So if you delete it, I'd certainly understand. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 15:08, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The Burren

I modified the Image:The Burren 01.jpg to make it better looking but notice that in the gallery that I made on The Burren page the image has not been regenerated to display the current, better quality, image. When I set up up as a new thumbnail, it came out fine but when I went back to a gallery, the image that shows is still an old one. HOw does one force the system to regenerate a new image? Cheers ww2censor 18:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:MWolf.jpg

Hi Stan. I noted the source of this image and that there was no notice of copyright on the photo or page of display. --Fahrenheit451 23:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Some images uploaded by CeeGee

Hi User:Stan Shebs. Thanks a lot for attaching the right copyright tag to some images I had uploaded. I am really confused to find the right one. CeeGee 20:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:PSP and DS.jpg

Look at the history of Image:PSP and DS.jpg. You'll see the image is public domain. Edward 11:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

FU orphaning practice

I do now. I didn't know the template codes when I started clearing up.Geni 13:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:USSPivotAM276.jpg

Not sure why you put the unknown source thing up on that. When I uploaded the photo a selected the work of a US government agency option which should have been good enough. I added additional information on the photo. Now this offical USN photo from the National Archives differs from the version that appeared in Life Magazine (1944). In the Life Magazine version, censors airbrushed out the radar antenna. Do you need me to add that as well? --71Demon 23:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

FN Scar

the photo was a publicity image issued by the US govt when the contest was over. therfore it's PD

Cleaning up

Stan, I do my best to finish cleaning up and try to restore the images which are removed from articles. Thanks Shyam ^(T/C) 16:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Greetings, I think it is done and almost all of them are tagged correctly but its hard to find out your own mistake. I have left some images which are upladed by User:Phatcat68 because user has already so many uncopyrighted image. If you found some more images which are unfit in this category, please let me know. But I want to notice you one thing User:OrphanBot should check atleast once before detaching the images from articles. Regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 22:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Himachel Pradesh Map

Dear Stan: Thanks for contacting me - I don't know how this has all come about. I must have done this when I first started using the Wikipedia and didn't know much about creating articles, uploading images, copyright, etc. I can't remember even posting the map and, if I did, where it came from. Put it down to "Oldtimers' disease." Sorry if I have caused any hassle - it was certainly not intentional. Unless an attribution for the map can be found I agree that it should be removed. Cheers, John Hill

Image Tagging Image:Pkk.gif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Pkk.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media 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 media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, 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. Thank you. Stan 04:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

No one knows who created the PKK's flag and/or logo. If any copyrighting exist at all (as organisation is "terrorist" and hence " illegal hence cant even press charges), PKK should own them. So I sourced and tagged image accordingly.

May I ask if you could shorten the warning mesage, I and many others know the procedure, really.

--Cool Cat^Talk|@ 11:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

The theory is that each user should only ever see the message once; as it says, "If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too.". After all, every image whose description you don't fix up is more work that you're making for other people. Stan 17:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but in reality I do not have a way to keep track of all images I uploaded. I wasn't in the know of the image tagging on my earlier days on wiki. You know how it goes...

If you have the time, can you please review every image I uploaded (as you are perhaps using a bot) and find the images I forgot to tag. There shouldn't be many.

--Cool Cat^Talk|@ 21:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Sub alarms

I invite your attention to User:the Epopt/Sub alarms. I've started the article in user-space because I fear it would not survive an AfD attack in its present form. Please make any (suggestions for) improvements you can think of. Thanks for your help! ➥the Epopt 21:16, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Grenada st george.jpg

I wouldn't worry about the copyright for it, the person who uploaded it works directly for the foundation as jimbo's assistant and is therefore would be extremely careful about the copyright status. It came form the hebrew wikipedia. Mike _{(T C)} 02:45, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Problem with User:Sherool

First of all, sorry about the comments previously made by me about OrphanBot, actually i was not aware of, how the bot works. Sherool is tagging the images with {{nsd}} which are already tagged with a fair use tag. Is it an appropriate thing? See it for example.

Thanks stan, now the need of no-source tag even including these type of tags is understood. I have some problems to tag {{PD-old}} because it is difficult to calculate how old is the image, image seems to be pretty old and articles associated to the image also satisfy this condition but sometimes it may be wrong. Should I tag those images with {{nsd}}. But most of those images go for deletion because of unawareness of the uploader. Please suggest. Regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 22:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Stan, don't you think 18th-century is too old, hardly we get of images which belong to 18th-century. I am trying to emphasize the images which are related to 19th and early 20th(upto 1920)-century. Will {{PD-old}} do or not? Thank you, Shyam ^(T/C) 22:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for bothering you again, but i have a doubt again: for {{GFDL}} images is there a requirement to tag with {{nsd}}? See:Image:Hkfflag.gif. Jiang has tagged the image with no source even having GFDL tag, I think most of the GFDL image do not have a source. So please suggest me further. Thank you, Shyam ^(T/C) 13:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Me, again. What I am trying to say is, is it unjustice to that image or not. If we are tagging an image with no source having GFDL tag then we should process all the images with that. If i am wrong, then please correct me because there are lot of thing to learn for me here. Thank you for your quick responding. Regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 15:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Ogre.jpg

it's promotional Naufana

pdp11 images

I took the photo so feel free to add a {{PD-self}} tag to it. I've no idea where the tag is supposed to be added, but if you'd like to add it on my behalf that's fine.

Joe Kernen image

This is another old image from about a year ago that I uploaded and I can't remember doing it, even. Sorry I can't find the source, you can delete it if you need to. JHMM13 (T | C) 05:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Genova image

Tge picture was mine, I just forgot to mention it. I put it under creative commons license. Love G.dallorto 10:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Jan1.gif

Stan, you have tagged the image with {{orfud}} even it is not as fair use. I was doing same previously but Howcheng denied to do so. Please suggest. Shyam ^(T/C) 16:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:MS FENNICA MS NORDICA.jpg

For an image like Image:MS FENNICA MS NORDICA.jpg, we really need more than a URL to demonstrate sourcing. Otherwise every gallery of copyvios on the net can be claimed to be a "source". The website needs to make some kind of affirmative statement that "this is our picture, not somebody else's that we are borrowing/got permission for/copyvio'ing because we can". Stan 19:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

If you look through the source URL given for this image, it seems clear to me that that company designed and built these two ships. It may not be explicitly stated, but I think it's a logical assumption that they own the copyright to the image. Regards, howcheng {chat} 19:41, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Either one of may be correct in this case. However, I think we both agree that it is highly unlikely the web site in question did not just nick this image from somewhere else. I think that as long as we are acting in good faith, the fair use of this image is likely to be approved. Going through WP:FUC, I don't see how this does not qualify for use in the MS Fennica article. howcheng {chat} 20:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

misc

Does the word 'chill' mean anything to you?

User:Jguk

Stan, no i was unable to contact the user as he left a message on his talk page that he would not see messages on his talk page and he has not put any e-mail ID on his preferances. But I assumed it should be PD as he has not described any constraint about use of image on the image page, is there any harm to do so? I have done so with some other images also. One more thing, how you deal with these non-sense messages as you have seen on my talk page. I have warned the user to block. What else I can do? I eagerly wait your kind suggestions. Regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 14:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, stan. Okay, I will take care of that from now. I also sometime use {{GFDL-presumed}}, but try to avoid this particular tag because we have to work again on this particular category after tagging all untagged images. One more thing, should I ask or not? something personal, but don't take it otherwise, I saw 'you are one of the inactive bureaucrats', why? are you not happy with this post? If you are not interested to answer this question, then please ignore this. Regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 21:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tunis1

What exactly is wrong with you? No specified copyright holder? I clearly specified, I took the picture and I specified the date: August 2004. Norum 15:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I have just read your message. No problem, it has been fixed. Norum

Re: Image copyright problem with Image:Siteabelhavoo2.jpg

Before posting this image I had contacted the person who took it and received his approval. If this is not sufficient let me know what is. thanks Shoefly 22:28, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image Tagging Image:Blue2.JPG

I took the picture and tagged it accordingly. What else am I supposed to do? Shoefly 22:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Your replied: "You say you "received his approval", but for what? To license under GFDL? To license under a version of Creative Commons? To put in the public domain? We must use one of the standard licenses, because they cover all the legal angles, such as commercial use in printed version of WP. Just a "permission to use in WP" is completely insufficient. Stan 23:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)"

Ok, so what form of license would be the most commercially restrictive but still postable in Wikipedia? GFDL, CC, PD? Shoefly 23:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

You replied: "{{cc-by}} is the most restrictive available I think, but in any case you would have to send another message to the photographer, so you might as well send him links to our articles on each license, let him choose from them. Stan 23:14, 19 March 2006 (UTC)"

Ok, I will do. Thanks Shoefly 23:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Guidance

Thank you so much for your reply. Stan, I am willing to be a sysop. Will you please guide me to be an admin. I know it would be very difficult to manage some time, but if you can manage some time in doing the same I will be very very thankful to you. Please reply which is more convenient to you. My best regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 22:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Stan, please block the Chrisobyrne. I am afraid with what is he going to do now. Thank you, Shyam ^(T/C) 12:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:P1010024.JPG

I have ameded the license to GNU Free. Many thanks, Griffin147

Cruithne semi-major axis image

Stan - thanks for the message on my discussion page, to which I've written a response. I'm going on vacation at the weekend, and I'll finalise the big decision as to how many of my remaining contributions to un-edit when I return. The one thing I'm going to do before I leave is point out that on Comet_Halley, I added a date of 27 March for the comet's perihelion of 2134, and that date is all my own work and was published on http://www.chris.obyrne.com/celestia/ before I put it on Wikipedia, and hence (I think) violates my own copyright! I also added the other dates for the comets perihelion - however, I got (confirmation of) those dates from other sources on the web (I did not find any source for the 2134 perihelion).

I'm not going to protect the other hand-drawn image I have on Wikipedia - hopefully it will be deleted before I return from my vacation.

Chrisobyrne 16:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

You said my images need tags

How do I indicate the source - just the URL it came from ? How do I do that? SO if its PD I just add the following?

{{PD-US}} thanks SimonATL 08:44, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:POLYSICS Hiroyuki Hayashi-9-30-03.jpg

Having taken the photo myself, I can assure you there are no copyright issues at all. DarKrow 15:19, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

images

Greetings,

Please delete the two images: Image:Iranian people.jpg and Image:Arabs of Iran.jpg

they are no longer needed. I took care of tagging the rest.

Thanx again.--Zereshk 20:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Muir-beach.JPG

I think I fixed it correctly Ebeisher 20:05, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Linux.vollwaschmittel.jpg

Please see Image talk:Linux.vollwaschmittel.jpg. --Joy [shallot] 12:36, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Viribus Unitis class battleship

Hello Stan, about a year ago, we discussed the title of $subj at Talk:Viribus Unitis class battleship. It now seems that User:TheFEARgod has found a book that explicitly mentions the peculiarity of the class name. So, would you agree with me that the move is appropriate now? -- Sandius 14:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Survey

I am conducting a survey on Wikipedia and would like to invite you to participate in the study. I've posted a message on wikien-l, but here is the link again in case you are not subscribed to that list-serv. Thanks a lot for your time! --Mermes 02:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Clear SE

I actually got that pic off the web. If you'll have read the entry, you know these are extremly rare. There is no humanly way I could own one. I'll try and confirm the copyright status. I can also provide the website I got it from. You can ask them if you can use their picture. Thanks for your concern, Mac4Eva 14:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Update Here's the siteFor the Clear SE Photo I couldn't find much of a copyright policy, but that's your department. Thanks again, Mac4Eva 14:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I think that the 1 by 0.5 inch photo is a nice addition to the SE page. But only 10 were ever made. Sure, I would love to walk up to someone and say, "Hey, I love that mac. Mind if I take a pic?" but it's not that simple. And yes, there are pleny of photos on the web, but I don't have the time to track down some noboby and askind if I can use their picture. If thisone picture is going to be a thorn in your flesh, you may as well delete it. No sense in debating endlessy over a small image in a vast ocean of articles. Mac4Eva 18:45, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikispecies logo

Please review very carefully the discussions for the logo contest for the Wikispecies logo. I CREATED THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT FOR THE LOGO. The concept of DNA strands sprouting from a wiki ball, the colors, the proportions - all mine. And I gave the concept to the Wiki foundation as directed in the contest. Another desinger polished the image in an editing program and added shadows, etc.

By your notice on my talk page, I have to assume you object to my display of this conceptual sketch? Please remove this copyright deletion notice. It is VERY important to me that my role in the creation of this image not be lost through edits like this. jk

Image:Borusewicz.JPG

Dear Stan, I've re-itroduced the GFDL tag on this image because it turns out that it IS being licensed by the Senate of Poland under GFDL (After seeing your comment, I had doubted this as well). It is explained at pl:Dyskusja_Wikipedii:Opisy_licencji_grafiki (unfortunately in Polish), and I also got an email from the senate webmaster confirming this. This applies to all photos of Senators on the polish senate pages www.senat.gov.pl, but not the web page design (duh). A similar situation applies to the Polish Sejm (Lower house) pages, and the Polish President's pages. Deuar 17:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the good ideas, I'll try to get around to making that category :) Deuar 19:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Capitan#External_links

12:47, 6 April 2006 Stan Shebs (rv linkspam) 

• Virtual tour of El Capitan

Stan,

I'm curious why you consider this link linkspam? The article has valuable content and the virtual tour is pretty stunning. I may be missing the point of wiki but I found the content of value as the virtual tour sets the user in the scene much better than a still image could. Cheers,

I didn't see any factual info not already in our article, and the virtual tour is kind of a yawn, doesn't have anything not in our commons gallery. There are literally thousands of websites who try to piggyback off WP's high rankings, so it's not like you're the first who's had the idea. If it wasn't me, somebody else would have scrubbed it. Stan 18:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Well I don't agree with the "yawn" of a virtual tour I think the difference between the web and print is that you "can" show virtual tours and other media that might be of interest to users, a still image will only show so much. I'll stick to writing copy and posting still images as to not go outside the rigid guidelines imposed.

Map50.jpg

The image is a fair use image of a board game map, for review purposes.Michael Dorosh 06:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Pierre Desproges

Sorry, i uploaded File:Pierre Desproges.jpg when i was beginner... this image should be deleted. pyl 22:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Copyright

Please help me!

  You wrote that my "plasmoid" graphic was been deleted, or will be, because of copyright questions. I do not upload graphics which are copyrighted elsewhere. Thiss one is from my own article (as noted), published in "Reviews of Geophysics" while I worked for NASA. Because of my affiliation at the time, it's in the pblic domain.

David P Stern http://www.phy6.org/stargaze/Sstern.htm (you can reply to my home e-mail; I am not a regular with Wikipedia but maintain my own sites. I just tried to provide some professional material).

(P.S.: I once heard one the series of which you displayed a stamp supposedly showed Columbus scanning the horizon through a spyglass. Trouble was, the telescope had not yet been invented at that time. Does such a stamp exist?)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Splittail, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 16:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Speedy delete images ?

Hi Stan. Is it possible you could speedy delete an image? See Image:Hiv2.JPG, Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2006 April 16. Hiv2.JPG is a copy of confidential information. Thank you. --ElectricEye 08:37, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image copyright problem with Image:Baronius with hand.jpg

I took this image. I own the image, and am capable of changing the license on it. How do I go about preventing its deletion and granting license on it?

LinuxDude 16:12, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Personal attack by Yellow

This troll is puking on me at Talk:Punkies Anwar saadat 10:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Zpp.gif

Stan, the ZPP.gif image is a scan I personally made from a promotionary Brochure that they were handing out in a public exhibition in Iran.

I dont know how else to explain "the source". The brochure gave no other information.

I dont think it is even protected, even under Iranian copyright laws.--Zereshk 23:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

The copyright holder was of course the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran itself of course, a government organization. That's where I got the brochure from.

But then again, the United States has no copyright relations with Iran. Iran's govt isnt subscribed to any binding international copyright treatiy themselves as well. They are a member of WIPO, but are not a signatoire to the intellectual rights provisions. They do have domestic copyright laws of course, no doubt. But they dont apply internationally. (there was a special template tag saying just that. I am unable to find it)

At any rate, the decision is yours. It's not that serious.--Zereshk 15:14, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Empty fish stubs

I know, right? That's exactly what I said here! --Brazucs (_TALK | ^CONTRIBS) 22:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, yes I know. I just felt bad that I insulted some people and thought creating those stubs was a good way to, uh, de-insult, lol. --Brazucs (_TALK | ^CONTRIBS) 01:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Wait a second...

You will block me from further editing because of that image? I even forgot that I uploaded that image. I suppose that you have in mind this edit:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image%3APannonian_plain01.jpg&diff=24839748&oldid=18074940

I would appreciate that you hear my explanation for that edit before you say that you will block me from further editing. The date of that edit is 5 October 2005 and in that time I did not know much about these copyright tags. I uploaded that image and user:Superm401 taged it with "no source". I saw that and I did not know how to provide source, so I went to IRC chat and asked editors from Serbian Wikipedia how to provide source, and they said that I only should to put "fair use" tag on the image and that would be enough, so I done it. Later, I learned that "providing the source" is something different than to tag image with "fair use", so I do not repeat that mistake any more. It is not nice that you threat that you will block me because of that one mistake (which was not done with bad intentions, but because I was STUPID). So, I have no idea what is a source for that image, but I apologize for taging it with "fair use" and I certainly will not do that again. I think that blocking policy exist to prevent users to have wrong edits in the FUTURE, not because of one mistake that they done in the PAST. PANONIAN (talk) 13:24, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

---

I do not know a source for that map, so you will have to delete it. I have a collection of about 8,000 maps in my computer and most of these maps (including that one) I found somewhere on the Internet, but I do not remember where I found it. I do not upload maps for which I do not know source any more. Several months ago I was uploading such maps, but since they have problem with copyright, I started to upload only maps which were drawn by me. I will not upload maps with no source any more and if you find couple more maps with no source information which I uploaded several months ago and taged them with "fair use", you can delete them. I thought in that time that "fair use" is a proper tag for them, and by the way, Wikipedia image policy was not so harsh in that time. PANONIAN (talk) 01:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

---

Re: Images wrongly marked as unsourced

I have talked with others, and it is standard to include a source (aka, who took them and/or from where the image has been picked, not just a slight description of the show). Only promotional images do not need a source, as they have been released by companies themselves.

My idea is to replace every image that has been tagged with a valid licensed and sourced image, with a fair use rationale, which I cannot right now add as I have not uploaded the image. -- ReyBrujo 12:29, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

After privately talking with a friend, I have decided to revert the changes I have made. While I don't agree per my previous statement, I agreed with him to only keep tagged images that have the screenshot Fair use license but no description of the show where they have been found. -- ReyBrujo 12:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Category :Ray Finned Fish

I see your point. To be fair one of the original reasons for me to create the page has reduced considerably. One of the problems with the page originally was that half of the subcategories had scientific names and the other half used common names, result total chaos. Someone has got rid of most of the common names lately and replaced them with scientific names - I would do the rest myself but us mere mortals dont seem to have the power to rename categories. If that occured it would be reasonable to add the links to common fish species for each family to the ray finned fish article and delete it from the category. How do you rename categories? PS this is a much more constructive way to effect change than wholesale unilateral deletion (this also posted on cat:ray finned fish discussion page) Kerripaul 19:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I think I will have a go for the simple reason that 43 out of 48 categories are already in the latin names Kerripaul 19:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Passenger Ships

Stan: Thank you for your helpful comments. I'm new to this game and I am still learning its conventions. I will either return the section in passenger ships to the main article, or make a new one. But first I have to figure out how to add cites to sources, as right now the discussion gives no cites, and also to some extent is based on computations. ~

Images with obvious source

To the contrary, screenshots should cite the person who took it, or if the uploader didn't take it, where they found it on the internet. --Rory096 18:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Image use policy says

Source: ... URL of the webpage the image came from

As the image is a screenshot, if he created the image himself, he should be saying that, or if he found it on the internet, he should cite the URL. --Rory096 20:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Beneficence.jpg

The photo was taken by me. I made this clear in the article, I am quite certain. Apparently the image was already removed though.

opinions solicited on programming language

I would welcome your input on improving programming language. Ideogram 00:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Some vandallism assistance needed

Last week I was on RC patrol and noted the removal of deletion tag from pages started by User:Adrak so I wanted to tell him that he was vandalising those pages and might be blocked for such removals. On visiting his talk page a second time, I saw he had removed my previous warning left there thereby giving the distinct impression of a clean and unblemished track record. Unfortunately there is no record of his contributions pages because they have been deleted. My first warning on his page was like this but I am sure you will check his history for yourself.

Now he is annoyed with me and despite a reasonably polite reply to his comment on my talk page, he has left a vandalism warning on my talk page today which is absolutely unjustified. IMHO, this is itself blatant revenge vandalism and should not be tolerated. Obviously his comment re rules for vandalism are not mine but Wikipedia's. What's your opinion and what do you suggest? I am not into a tit for tat thing but he does not seem to what is vandalism and what is not. Cheers 13:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

So are you saying his annoyance should only be directed at my tagging pages he made (that have since been deleted), or is he justified in being annoyed at my criticism of his removing tags from his talk page? You will of course agree his tagging of my talk page is itself vandalism. Thanks Stan. ww2censor 18:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. Cheers ww2censor 22:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Christmas seal US 1925.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Christmas seal US 1925.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Laura Scudder ☎ 16:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi

You may be interested in to see these: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Albert_Ekka&diff=prev&oldid=62715215

My rollback should be seen in the light of my clarifications. In India, we have a liberal law relating to such issues. Regards. --Bhadani 12:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I have corrected my stand. [7] - [8] - [9]. Thank you, You Mr. Right. --Bhadani 13:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Philately stubs

I added this to Prathheeps page following your earlier message:

re: Philately stubs

Did you know we already have a {{philately-stub}} ? For future reference, the choice of a Hitler head for {{phil-stub}} is really not a good idea. Stan 12:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I entirely agree with Stan and I am recommending this stub for deletion. We should all be using {{philately-stub}}. There are only three or four links to it in any case and I've moved those to the standard stub. --Jack 05:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

British post offices in Africa

I like it. I've got the George VI stamp you've displayed. Well done. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 21:11, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Current mac project collaboration

The current WP:MAC collaboration is Apple II family. Please devote some time to improve this article to featured status. — Wackymacs 13:53, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Reversion

Thank you for reverting vandalism to arapaima. This article is a bit close to my heart because the first image I ever uploaded to Wikipedia was of one of these fish. --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · contribs · e@} 03:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Menodora

Hi Stan - the ref you'd cited for this (just earlier today!) gave me a 404 'does not exist' error when I tried it just now; could you check it please? For the time being I've replaced it with another ref. - MPF 23:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Kalkbrenner

I noticed you started the article Friedrich Kalkbrenner. Can you please provide the source that states his father was Jewish, because I can't find any information concerning that. Maybe its a book? If its possibly a mistake, please revise it. Thank you. 72.144.150.170 15:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

As the template on the bottom notes, the text, including the Jewish reference, started as a verbatim lift from the 1911 Britannica, which does not give its own sources, sorry. Stan 15:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Zermatt_and_Matterhorn.jpg delist nomination

Hi, I have nominated your photograph of Zermatt and Matterhorn to be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Please see the reasons for the nomination at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Zermatt_and_Matterhorn.jpg_delist. --KFP 12:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Forensic philately

I've been trying, without success, to find out when this term began to be used to refer to the study of fakes and forgeries. We have a red link to it in Philately, and Google keeps feeding me sites that copy from that article, or people that want to sell the Herman Herst book. Any ideas? Eclecticology 07:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I was afraid I would get that kind of answer.:-) AFAIK I don't have a copy of the Herst book. (I already have an insanely huge collection of philatelic literature, and I keep discovering things that I never knew that I had.) I have a broken run of the later volumes of Herst's Outbursts, but have not yet had the time to see if it uses the term. Several other books that I have on forgeries do not make use of "forensic philately". Does Herst define the term in his book?

It would be nice to see this general topic developed in an article, and the title Forensic philately would be a very convenient one. My concern is in insuring that we not be doing original research by inventing our own definition of the concept. Eclecticology 17:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Illegal stamps

Could you please have a look at this article. The article purports to recharactrize what was previously called "bogus stamps" as "illegal stamps". It makes reference to the work of the Worldwide Association for Development of Philately (WADP), an association which it claims to be affiliated with the UPU. The entire tone of the article seems highly POV, and I have already removed a section which claimed that certain individuals were involved in the distribution of illegal stamps without showing any evidence that they were ever convicted. I didn't want to go any further with this article without a second opinion. Eclecticology 07:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't get Linn's so I haven't been following the discussions there. Still I think that bogus is a more appropriate term. Illegal implies something that can be prosecuted, and there appears to be very little of that. Counterfeits are certainly illegal, as are forgeries. Bogus stamps could be fraudulent, but who has jurisdiction when neither the stamps in question nor their producers have ever been in the country on the face? The warnings posted with the UPU are wide ranging, and even include the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus whose stamps are included in Scott. "Bogus" can be more strictly defined as stamps falsely purporting to be valid for postage. This would allow room, if needed, to include other intentionally deceptive material, like the Sedang stamps. Stamps from entities such as Biafra and Turkish Cyprus that at least have a sensible rationale for issuing stamps even when nobody recognizes them probably should not be viewed as illegal. Eclecticology 09:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I went over this article quite carefully some time ago and did not any particular POV to it. Regarding the title, the UPU itself calls these type of issues Illegal stamps do I think the title is quite appropriate though bogus might be a consideration but only if better justified than the suggestion above. BTW, you may have seen that Eclecticology removed a lot of material regarding alleged producers of illegal stamps that are well known and documented without any discussion or providing any alternate text. He may be right to remove name but I have yet to consider rewriting some of the known facts on this aspect as I think it is appropriate to the article.

Perhaps these two topics should really be discussed on the talk page. Please move it there is you think it is the right thing to do as we are more likely to get others involved. ww2censor 16:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, talk page would be good. Ec and I go back to a time when all the Wiki-philatelists would comfortably fit in a phone booth (pillar box?), we're not quite that impoverished now... :-) Stan 22:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I have moved the two topics mentioned above to the article discussion page per Stan's suggestion ww2censor 02:14, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Christmas Island

Hello Stan. Don't know what's happened to this. It was in the Christmas Island article but someone apparently removed it because of a "fair use" doubt. The one I have in my own "gallery" (which has only three entries!) has a different name. I was experimenting at the time so perhaps it's as well to let it go. I'll get back to scanning (and stamps) in due course. Regards. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 09:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

stamp photo

hello. I wonder could you provide a photo for tête-bêche, you being one of the most prolific contributors concerning philately? cheers.:)--K.C. Tang 04:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I added some links to stamp images, including one to a forgery, but have been unable to find a usable image. I added some information about tête-bêche being produced during booklet manufacture and sourced a link to Tony Walker's magnificent block of 24 Machin booklet stamps showing 4 tête-bêche pairs. Maybe he would let us use an image of those stamps. ww2censor 14:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I have a vague memory of an old tête-bêche pair in my collection, but will take a while to thumb through all the albums... Stan 20:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

We're in luck, I was wool-gathering a bit and remembered that Switzerland did these around the turn of the century, and album practically fell open to it - a pair of the Tell's son design from 1910. Stan 21:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

lovely pics! :)--K.C. Tang 01:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

About your comments in Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego

If you count Pt. Williams as a city, because it is populated the whole year etc, etc, etc, the Esperanza Base, which has permanent population, a school, a chapel, and a radio station has to be the southernmost. The base's motto is (Google says) "permanence, a sacrificing act" —Argentino (talk/cont.) 18:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Xconq

I started an article on Xconq and a 'what links here' check revealed that you mentioned it about 2 years ago :> If you still have an interest in this subject perhaps you'd care to take a look. (Although Xconq development itself appears to have died off.) Thanks, Marasmusine 11:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Letter sheet

Hi Stan. I've been working on the article Letter sheet and have a temp page here. Perhaps you could look it over, though it is still a work in progress and not yet close to publishing. I will be adding more as I refer to my source books here. Any comments appreciated. ww2censor 16:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

You must not have had time to look at this but maybe when you get a chance. Thanks

Also, I have been working on some stamp articles and using the infobox but saw that there are some articles on the French and German wikipedia that might be translated but, how do I get to use the images (not commons images) that are uploaded to the foreign wikis on the English wiki, or do I just have to copy and re-upload using the same license as appropriate. Cheers ww2censor 15:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Plant Articles

I loved a comment of yours I found on some plant talk or archive or somewhere:

Thanks for the response! First off, I love having the technical description of family boundary - as a strictly amateur botanist, that's the sort of thing I want to learn more about, and this article is exactly the right place to do it. At the same time, I was a neophyte of plants not too long ago, and an opening sentence like "The name Malvaceae is a botanical name at the rank of family" borders on the meaningless to non-botanists. As this is a general encyclopedia, the first paragraph needs to be nontechnical and context-setting, with the more extended discussion occurring as one goes down further into the article; see Wikipedia:Lead section and related pages for more explanation of this point. Although tremendously interested in the subject, I've actually been inhibited from working on plant articles because it's never clear to me just what should be in them. So that this discussion is not just me carping, I propose that we use the plants wikiproject to define standard content for articles about different levels of taxa, perhaps even propose taxobox usage that better reflects taxonomic uncertainty. Stan 18:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Did you ever get an answer? I've posted a couple of times trying to get some suggestions along these lines but have been ignored. I also want the introductory sentences to say that the Amborellaceae are a family of flowering plants found only on New Caledonia, include their larger group and one important comment--it's a general encyclopedia. Then go on to say Amborellaceae is the scientific name and its common name is Cool Basal Angiosperm of Undistinguished Appearance (CBAUA). Or whatever. Nice try. KP Botany 18:49, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm more interested in families than lower taxa. Yes, the older family monographs are wonderful reading. I just picked up a used one on Echinocactus. You've fleshed out a good start for opening sentences, maybe you could offer me some suggestions about what others would find more useful as guidelines for the families? You had mentioned something earlier about my style that was useful. Also, this is a good start "the first paragraph needs to be nontechnical and context-setting," for all Wikipedia articles. I'll look at the Wikipedia style points you mention also. KP Botany 20:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Renaming a WikiProject

Do you know if it is possible to rename a WikiProject? The Grand Prix motorcycle racing project exists but I think it is too restrictive in scope and have commented to that effect on the Grand Prix racing talk page. Currently there is no motorcycling WikiProject that, if established, could encompass the Grand Prix project and other aspects of the topic in a broader way hopefully attracting more editors than now (only 5 members). At the moment there is a proposal to start a motorcycle project and a temporary discussion page here. I would appreciate your advise as an admin. Thanks Stan ww2censor 18:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

You'd just need to do a normal move, there's nothing special about project pages. Or you could create the overall motorcycling project and make the Grand Prix a subjproject - curious that such a project is missing (at least according to Category:WikiProject Transport, certainly no lack of interest in the subject. Stan 22:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Request

Could I ask you to delete Image:Âÿçüìà.jpg? I have a free replacement ready in Commons. Thanks, Ghirla ^-трёп- 07:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Images Licensing

Hi I received a message from you on Oct 14, 2006. Can you let me know what images it is that you were referring to? Thanks Benjwong 18:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

rumors

Hey there. I've heard a rumor that you've left Apple. What's up with that? Do you have a new e-mail? Dr.frog 20:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Question about your edit: [10]

Hi, I want to know what the copyright policy is about Indian stamps? Is there any restriction to putting it up of sites like wikipedia... more importantly does the Indian Postal Service prosecute those who print images of stamps? I'm asking this because stamp images have appeared in major newspapers in India. --hydkat 07:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I don't think the saving space thing is really that bothersome, but I get the point about context for fair use and the erm... lack of 'legal protection' :), Thnx --hydkat 17:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

An experiment

Pleas have a look at Talk:Sun Yat-sen stamps, and put whatever comments you have there. I've been playing a bit with cataloguing. (Yeah, me and a million other people that get pissed off with Scott. :-)) It's the beginning of an attampt at a new numbering system, and I believe you mentioned once about having ideas of this sort yourself. Eclecticology 07:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Debate about (US) vs. (U.S.) vs. (United States) as disambiguators re-opening

Given that you expressed an opinion in the past, I thought you'd like to know that the debate has re-opened at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (abbreviations). Feel free to express your opinion again (if you wish). Thanks! hike395 07:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow!

Just read your user page. You work on the Firefox browser. That's awesome! It's my favourite browser and I think it's really cool :) AppleJuggler 04:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi again Stan. It's amazing that you guys are already working on version 3 even though version 2 was released only lately. I think Firefox is a damn good brower - its light and highly functional (has lots of helpful functions) for its given 'lightness'. Keep up the good work. I have a simple question though, with regards the 'Bookmarks Toolbar' on Firefox, was wondering if you might be able to advise. I have one full Bookmarks Toolbar already. Do you know if there is a way to add another Bookmarks Toolbar? AppleJuggler 04:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

New Photo Matching Service

Hi there,

I'm contacting you because you listed yourself at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. You might be interested in a new wikiproject page that lists photographers and articles that need photos by location. The page is located at Wikipedia:Photo Matching Service or WP:PMS GabrielF 00:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Photo Request

I'd love to help, but my camera is broken and I'm saving up money to just replace it with something newer. -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 19:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Astrophilately

That's awesome. I've nominated it for Did you know?, just because I think everyone else will have the kind of dubious response I had when they see "Mail? IN SPACE?" Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 17:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Flaming

"Yeah, you don't want to be like that KP Botany guy on commons who's been flaming Franz Xaver over which categories images should be in... :-)" Clearly a sock puppet, or whatever you call a mimic (I guess it would be mine if it were a sock, not mine, no way.).) I now directly upload small pictures to articles on Wikipedia--I hate these 50K images, but can't deal with Wikimedia, and have many pictures that are lacking in articles. The other language Wikipedia users can at least find them in here. It surprised me that there is one page for Wikimedia Flora of California implying there are only images of some 40 or so species of CA plants, when a search by the knowledgable (know the flora, not Wikimedia), turns up hundreds uncategorized--but only the brave or stupid would go there and categorize a second time, maybe the computer savvy, not the nature photographer. Why don't you go shoot one of the Bay Area Amborellas for me, just a leaf, that's all I ask? KP Botany 00:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, UCB has one in its greenhouse with the tropical plants, just inside the door on the left, and UCSC has more than one, and probably males and females, but a leaf will do, just a leaf to start with--close up of flowers, of course, if available, but a single leaf would be nice. I've asked a couple of other folks who actually travel to New Caledonia and know plants to also try for one, as in situ in its native habitat would be preferable. I'm not sure I believe it is more basal than the water lilies because of the female gametophytes, but I'm along for the ride for now, at least on Wikipedia where NOR applies.

I would hope that throwing all the Wikipedias together at commons would work out better, as only the Enlgish seems to me to be rampant with a certain level of disdain for experts (whom I often disdain), but it seems only to have created an incapacity to do anything. KP Botany 17:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I cheated. I heard they had it first, then went looking for it. It's beautiful, because it looks like some primitive Lauraceae. What's the benefit of being a programmer if you don't get to spend all that money? Isn't New Caledonia calling you? KP Botany 17:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I lucked out in the Mojave, getting to take a handful of trips with one of the researchers most knowledgable about its vegetation. I was shocked by how much was there that I knew nothing about. KP Botany 19:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Yuma Desert

A Nice job on the Yuma desert. A tip of the hat to you. The other person was the person who added all the Vegetation data. anyhowww... i(sic) live in Yuma (I may get in touch if i need help on something (halfway important)). "Happy trails" from this desert.. ..-Mmcannis 19:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Beautiful photo!

You found a wonderful image from the Wiki Commons for Sayan Mountains. It is specacular. I have a hard time finding pictures there, not understanding the category system very well. Thanks! Sincerely, Mattisse 16:30, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Zzyzx

Actually, the word in Adventure is xyzzy, not zyzzy. Still not zzyzx, so the removal is still appropriate. Thought you might want to know this important piece of information. :-)

Jordan Brown 17:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Penny blue

Oh yes. Sorry! I do have a number of actual 1840 penny blacks though but we have an image of this. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Tone template

Sorry. I guess I should read more carefuly. FirefoxMan 17:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)