User talk:Tonyjeff/Archive01

Welcome!

Hello, Tonyjeff/Archive01, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Karm a fist 19:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki links in Galician Gaita

Hi, the articles in different wikipedias do not have to be in 1:1 correspondence, so it is quite possible that in the Russian wikipedia, say, the galician gaita is just a section of the "bagpipe" article, not a separate article. Therefore, in general it is the owners of the foreign articles who are best qualified to set up the interwiki links.

In fact, that was the situation in the English Wikipedia, too. Last time I looked, there was a Gaita section in Bagpipes article. I didn't want to remove that section because Bagpipes had been a featured article. But that should bbe fixed. All the best, Jorge Stolfi 20:11, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tony, eu não me considero dono de artigo nenhum, mas naturalmente tenho um carinho especial com artigos nos quais eu colaborei e procuro consertar quando acho que outros fizeram coisa errada. No caso, não fui eu quem colocou alqueles interwiki links; mas desconfio que eles sobraram do tempo em que o artigo era um stub que chamava apenas "gaita" (apesar de ser sobre a gaita galega). Eu mudei o nome para "Gaita galega" para reduzir a confusão. Não sei qual é a situaćào nas outras Wikipedias --- talvez algumas tenham um artigo especial para "gaita galega", outros talvez ainda tenham só "gaita". O ideal seria que eles criassem um disambiguation article "gaita" que apontasse, entre outros para o respectivo "gaita galega", e acertassem os links. Por isso acho que deixar um apontador que de en:Galician gaita para zh:gaita, que pode estar (um pouco) errado, é melhor que não deixar apontador nenhum. Tudo de bom, Jorge Stolfi 01:14, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS. As for moving details from bagpipe to galician gaita (or other similar situations), certainly one should leave in the main article the most salient points of each alternative, the features that distinguish it from the others, and comments that compare them. But otherwise it seems best to push as many details as possible to the specific article. Keeping excess details in the master article would make it longer and hence waste the time of readers -- not only those who are not interested in that particular subtopic, but also those who are (they will end up reading those details twice). Duplication will also waste the editors' time in many ways. But this is just a vague guideline, of coruse. Jorge Stolfi 01:14, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Armas Imperiais

Hi. Really? I had no idea. If you can get the image with the correct coloring, I'd appreciate it. But if you could, go to the page of the current image and click on the "upload a new version of this image" button. Then, once you upload the new image, it will replace the current one in every page where it is being used currently, without us needing to go to each page and change the links. If you'd rather I do it, I would request only that you provide me with a link to the appropriate image, since I wouldn't want to end up uploading the wrong image. Thanks, Redux 17:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. It will be simple, but effective. What I'll do is I will save the new file to my hard drive and upload it again as a new version of the old image. Once that's done, the new image will replace the old one in the articles automatically. Once that's done and working properly, I will delete the present title Image:Bandeira-imperial-brasil.jpg, since it will be a duplicate of the used file. Redux 17:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All done. The file is at Image:ImperialArms.jpg now (and linked in the template and articles where the old one was). The link above is now blank, since I deleted it as a duplicate of the ImperialArms.jpg file. Redux 17:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check out Image:BrazilEmpireFlag.jpg. It's yet another image of the Brazilian Imperial Flag, although with a much lower resolution. Redux 21:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Associação Gaita-de-fole

Hi Can I urge you to read my comments on this talk page, before someone less tolerant than I am slaps a speedy tag on the article you've just begun. --Dweller 14:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Glad to help. Start by reading (sorry, I know it's dull) this article: WP:CORP. This explains what is and is not an organisation that is "notable" enough to deserve a Wikipedia entry. Note that good intentions or an excellent cause is not sufficient. What you need to be able to do is demonstrate that somewhere a bunch of people (and not Wikipedia itself) thinks it's important. Have you had press coverage in major newspapers/magazines? Does the organisation have 1,000,000 members? These sorts of things.

Understand the logic behind this. Without these kinds of guidelines, I could get 5 friends together and make some stupid club, call it "The Hairy Hands Club" fighting for the rights of people with hairy hands. Who is to say that my club is less worthy of inclusion than yours? --Dweller 18:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck. I'll watch the article and if anyone tries to have it deleted, I'll be able to hold it off for a day or two, but not much more, so don't hang about. At the moment, I think it would probably not survive a speedy, never mind a proposal for deletion. --Dweller 19:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Orphan article

Thanks, I've got ahead and removed the orphan article template. --W.marsh 02:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Deutscher Michel 1919.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Deutscher Michel 1919.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of '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 fair use images lacking such an explanation will 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of Erythrina crista-galli

Hi, could you follow up the discussion on Talk:Erythrina_crista-galli, i would like to know your opinion on the merge suggestion. Thanks, --Cacuija (my talk) 16:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Fala do Trono.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Fala do Trono.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will 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. Oden 18:13, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms

The colour is far too high (though the SVG colour is too low!). The white strings on both are fake. Look at

(a quick scan. I expect it's somewhere on .gov.ie, if all else fails do a FoIA request, as the pantone colours must be available somewhere. --Red King 20:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Libya COA

Thanks for the SVG! It looks much better than the raster versions. A minor note on process: tagging something with {{NowCommons}} nominates that image for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#I8, but that’s only for identical copies. For an image that has been replaced by a different image, use the WP:IFD process. I’ve nominated the PNG file there. —xyzzy_n 22:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Renamed Template:Infobox Cape Verde, Changed image.

Dunno why it protects from editing though...wierd. --Toussaint 15:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

xpost fm the commons

re: This conversation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tonyjeff#IE6_and_SVG_here

I'll just add this here as an Xpost: commons:Image:Deutschland Lage von Thüringen.svg is malfunctioning currently in Firefox v2 in the article: 1632 series... width is set for 200px by ({tlxw|1632width}}. The pic just doesn't manifest whatever. // FrankB 02:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC) (Check post:Tonyjeff)[reply]

Problemas com licença

Olá Tony... poderia dar uma olhada aqui? — Guilherme ^(t/c) 01:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]