User talk:Roger ambrose

Welcome!

Hello Roger Ambrose,[1] 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Deckiller 00:07, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Upload hints[edit]

Hello!

Thanks for uploading some pictures to Wikipedia. I wanted to make sure you were aware of some of the requirements and good practices for uploaded images.

Pick an image name.

When uploading an image, pick a file name that is descriptive, and unique. Remember that many images may be uploaded about the same topic, and remember that names are case sensitive.

Source the image.

On the image description page, explain where the image came from. If you created the image yourself, then say so. If it's from the web, give a URL. If it's a screenshot of a movie or game, or a scan from a book, give the title.

Provide copyright and license information.

This part is a little bit trickier, but it's very important. The copyright of the image generally belongs to whomever created it.

If it's a photograph you took, or an image you created (modifying an image that already exists doesn't count) in software like Photoshop or GIMP, then you own the copyright. To upload it to Wikipedia, you must agree to license it under the GFDL (which allows anyone to use it, but requires that they give credit to the original author and requires that any further edit to the image be licensed under the GFDL as well) or release it into the public domain (which allows anyone to use it for any purpose without restriction.) Do this by placing an appropriate tag on the image description page, like {{GFDL}} or {{PD}}. Be sure to mention that you created the image. If you're using {{PD}}, you may also want to use {{NoRightsReserved}}, since there is some dispute as to whether one may grant items into the public domain.

If you didn't create the image, or the copyright somehow belongs to another party (like a screenshot, which you might "create", but the copyright belongs to the author of the movie or video game), then you need to find another tag that describes the copyright status of the image. Images used on Wikipedia need to be free for our use and the use of sites which reproduce our content. This means that images cannot have a restriction such as "only for use by Wikipedia", or "for non-commercial use only", or "for educational use". Images without a free license may be usable in certain articles under fair use, but such a use should be justified on the image description page.

Describe the image.

To another reader, the image may not be immediately understood. A caption in an article doesn't explain the image to a visitor who sees it on its image page. Put a brief explanation of what is in the image on the image description page, similar to what you might include in a caption on an article.

Some links to Wikipedia pages on this subject:

Copyrights, Copyright tags, Fair use, Image description page, Public domain, Images for deletion, Possibly unfree images, Copyright problems, Uploading images

Thanks again for your contributions. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me at my talk page. --Sherool (talk) 15:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Roger ambrose-art director.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Roger ambrose-art director.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. Thank you. -Bogsat 17:30, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sherool & Deckiller advice sounds good. I think GFDL-self is correct for pictures you took (assuming the license is ok with you). I am not sure about collages since that incorporates others work. Hope that helps but I am new here also. -Bogsat 03:07, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pics[edit]

Hey there. Yeah, this is the correct one to use if you created the image:

I, the creator of this work, hereby grant the permission to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. Subject to disclaimers.

If this file is eligible for relicensing, it may also be used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license.
The relicensing status of this image has not yet been reviewed. You can help.

There shouldn't be any issues with that one. Happy editing! — Deckill e r 01:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Questions about type of license statement to use[edit]

Hi, I guess "it depends" is not the answer you where looking for, but it kinda does. Note that I'm no lawyer to copyright expert, I generaly just deal with the obvious problems regarding our policy. The following is based on my understanding of things based on hanging around image policy pages here for a while, you might want to try for example Wikipedia talk:Copyrights for more spesific copyright related issues.

Anyway, regarding the "work for hire" images: As I understand it the party paying for a work to be created usualy also hold the copyright to it, or at least share some rights to it so the photographer can't just turn around and sell the work they paid for to others (or give it away). I don't know what kind of deals or contracts you made regarding the images, but you should only use the GFDL or other free use license types if you are sure that you and you alone hold all and exclusive rights to the images (unless all other right holders have also agreed to let them be released under that license). Some of them also seem to contain trademarks with might be problematic becaue the GFDL license allow modifications and commercial use of the content. That said if you where just paid to make a set your employer would most likely not have any particular rights to any photos you made of the set as such, however if you made advertising material for them they likely do have some rights to it... So yeah, as I said I'm no expert on this side of things. As mentioned above I'd suggest trying Wikipedia talk:Copyrights and see if you can find someone more knowledgable than me (there are a few Wikipedians who are actual lawers and law students and such that watch that page I think) regarding these works you have made in a professional capacity as there might be some issues there.

The images that are made up in part of other people's images from the internet are as I understnd not rely yours, at least not unless you have obtained express permission from all the copyright holders of the various works, in wich case you might have shared rights to the image. See derivative work for some legal perspectives on this. Anyway for Wikipedia purposes such works wold in all likelyhood have to be used under fair use, and you might have some trouble making a convincing rationale to use them in your article.

For straight up "clean" photos made by yourself and not paid for by anyone are yours to do with what you wish and a GFDL-self license is just fine.

Note also that Wikipedia is not an image gallery, you might want to tone your article down a few notches, pick out just a few relevant "sample" pictires and reduce theyr display size (using Mediawiki image syntax) and such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherool (talk • contribs)

Image copyright problem with Image:01_KINGDOM_of_the_DINOSAUR.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:01_KINGDOM_of_the_DINOSAUR.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:Image legality questions. 14:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Commercial.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Commercial.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:Image legality questions. 09:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:IBASH_Las_Vegas...jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:IBASH_Las_Vegas...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:Image legality questions. 08:23, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Chester C. Ambrose may not be sufficiently well-known to merit articles of their own. The Wikipedia community welcomes newcomers, and encourages them to become Wikipedians. On Wikipedia, each user is entitled to a user page in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper, a subject must be notable. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects. --Joe Jklin 04:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Czeslaw Ambroziewicz may not be sufficiently well-known to merit articles of their own. The Wikipedia community welcomes newcomers, and encourages them to become Wikipedians. On Wikipedia, each user is entitled to a user page in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper, a subject must be notable. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects. --Joe Jklin 04:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In short, Roger... I regret this, but I've had to delete the entries you submitted on your family members. I'm truly sorry, but we have to have some minimal standards of notability. Would anyone who did not know them personally have ever thought to create an entry on them? DS 04:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...on the other hand, the entry on you, since you won an Emmy, definitely does stay. I've tidied it up a little bit; have a look. DS 04:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Article[edit]

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons says, in part, the following: "While Wikipedia discourages people from writing new articles about themselves or expanding existing ones significantly, subjects of articles remain welcome to edit articles to correct inaccuracies or to remove inaccurate or unsourced material."

What I meant by my comments is that I recommend that, as I said, you gather any relevant and independent sources you can find, and list them on the article's talk page. From there, other editors can determine what is appropriate and relevent for the article. I'd wait a bit, though, until the AfD is over. I'm not familiar with the Bob Fink article, but I've never seen an editor object to comments made by the subject on the talk page. Sorry if I've been unclear, but what I think you should do is take a week, maybe longer, and wait and see what becomes of the article. If it continues to exist, which I hope it will, your input will surely be welcomed at the article's talk page. If not, feel free to post at my talk page and I'll see if I can do something then. While I support the existence of your article, I have to admit that, at least from my point of view, your frequent comments are starting to detract from the potential support you could be getting from others. Thanks. --Maxamegalon2000 02:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um[edit]

...so, yeah, it's quite late here, and I'm too tired to mount a proper defense of your article just now. However, you may rest assured that I believe your article is worthy of a good defense, and I'll get on that tomorrow.. Academy Award winners get articles, that's for damn sure. DS 02:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MESSENGER -TV Pilot.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:MESSENGER -TV Pilot.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. User:Angr 09:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IFD notification[edit]

I have nominated a number of your images for deletion that you had used in your article that was deleted a while back. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2006 August 14 if you would like to discuss the issue. Thank you. BigDT 23:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:A Knott's Berry Farm -com.jpg and others listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:A Knott's Berry Farm -com.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 its not being deleted. Thank you. —Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 16:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following other entries were also listed:

--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 16:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]