User talk:Althepal/Archive 1

Welcome!
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 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 Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  K  a  mope  ·  talk  ·  contributions   01:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * Thanks! Althepal 03:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Helicon Filter
Thanks for your note. The pricing section is what makes me scream "advertisement". Could you remove that section, and just mention, elsewhere in the text, the price "range", from zero to $-whatever, without going into details? People interested in obtaining more info about the software will follow the external links to find out more. Greetings, --Janke | Talk 20:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay. I think the licenses section is okay now. To remove the section would be removing some other important info, but I think it is good now. Althepal 20:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Just one question: do you have a connection with the Helicon company? You seem so keen to keep the advertising parts in, that I wonder if it could be self-interest that makes you so resistant to any attempts by others to increase the quality of this (mainly) excellent article. Thanks - Adrian Pingstone 21:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No. I don't work for them, I don't sell their products, and they don't pay me or anything. I just use Helicon Filter and Helicon Focus. Anyhow, I don't think the pricing info is advertising. Is there a guideline which states it should be removed? The section does contain some important information, and I just think that the removal of such information should be backed by guidelines which clearly state it must be removed or a real consensus. Althepal 21:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Your vote on Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_February_9
I replied to your comment. - grubber 17:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Windows Vista Logo
Heya,

can you please give me a copy of the vista logo which you created in inkscape? my email is on my usr page.

thanks

symode09 05:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I answered on your talk page. Althepal 18:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Inkscape0.45.png
Hi. Very nice picture. Thanks for GPLing and uploading! Would you know if the SVG version of this pic is also GPL please, and if so where I can get it from? Thanks! --Rebroad 15:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I assume the image is also under a free license. Is the link to the page with all the screenshots. The one with the car has the link for the svg file. Althepal 05:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Podiceps-grisegena-008.jpg
Congratulations! Althepal 22:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Althepal,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Podiceps-grisegena-008.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-06-30.  howcheng  {chat} 18:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool! The caption's pretty good, but maybe it can also say how these guys always dive underwater and swim like that, because that's interesting. Althepal 00:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Comparison of hex editors
Your recent edit to Comparison of hex editors (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 14:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Your bot made the article a little out-of-date and restored a deleted template. I've undid that edit. Althepal 17:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Linksyslogo.svg
Hello Al. I fixed your picture. I tried to explain at the talk page. --Ysangkok 18:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Aero.svg
Hey, hope you don't mind that I modified Image:Aero.svg. — Alex(U 19:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That fine. I think it is more accurate now. Althepal 18:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation in Image:Winvista.png
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Winvista.png, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Winvista.png is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Winvista.png, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Winvista.png itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 18:48, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * So I'll put the fair use reasons. Thanks for letting me know. Althepal 19:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

You need to work on your edit summaries
Such as here. I put the tag there, so the text would be left alone, but I can tell you that I've never seen a mourning dove on a wire around here, period. This doesn't make it false, but if there are such claims, then it needs to be sourced. You can't just type in whatever you want, especially if you want to call this a "featured article". Wikidan829 23:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I beg your pardon? These birds commonly perch on wires. I see it all the time. You can even see it in the picture. There is no need for citation, since there is a picture. What do you expect? Some doctor to publish a book stating that doves land on wires, then we can cite this? Give me a break. Just because you don't notice it, doesn't mean it doesn't commonly happen. You seem to really feel for this issue for some reason, so in my policy of being a pal, I'll let you edit the caption as you wish and will not revert. Althepal 23:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * My message was in context of your borderline uncivil edit summary, not the content of the article. I'm also sure in my first message I did say "this doesn't make it false". In any case, it's still WP:OR, and there's no way around it. I don't know why a claim, good or completely stupid, should not carry the same weight. Wikidan829 23:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I simply thought you were joking, since the picture was right there. "Original research"? Is it also WP:OR to say the sky is blue or grass is green or rocks are hard? Althepal 23:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The statement made implies either: a) Mourning Doves were seen on wires more than other birds, or b) Mourning Doves were seen on wires more often than they were seen elsewhere. Either way, yes the bird is on the wire, that's a fact as displayed in the picture, and a more valid caption than a statement that sounds like it's more loaded than it actually is. I know it's stupid, there is a similar strange situation on History of Earth. An editor made a good faith edit a while ago, adding some "clock analogy" to the article, that does nothing but confuse the readers, because they don't read the article from top to bottom. It's not a big deal, just need to watch the wording. Wikidan829 23:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your suggestions. I will keep that in mind. I see what you are saying, that the caption sounds like it is saying something special about these birds. I don't agree with you with 100%, but that's okay. Althepal 23:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Np. Happy editing :) Wikidan829 23:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Same to you. :) Althepal 23:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Steve Jobs with iMac.jpg
Thank you for providing a fair use rationale for Image:Steve Jobs with iMac.jpg. The purpose of use description is only describing the image itself and is not explaining how the image "significantly increase[s] readers' understanding of the topic in a way that words alone cannot" (WP:NFCC #8). The image doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than being decorative, so I believe it should be deleted. Please let me know if you believe the image should be kept. – Ilse@ 14:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I only formatted the rational. Discuss it with the original unloader. I personally think it should be kept for Wikipedia for two reasons: Apple said it is okay for the type of use on Wikipedia (and almost all other types of use except for selling products), and because I believe it does help illustrate the article by showing the historic release of the first iMac. If you don't think this is correct, discuss it with the original unloader and not the person who formatted the rational. Althepal 17:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I addressed you because you had put in a . Maybe you are interested in the following, I nominated the image for deletion. – Ilse@ 11:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Jdrawscreenshot.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Jdrawscreenshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The article for JDraw was deleted, so the picture can go. Althepal 17:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Winvista.svg
Yay. — Alex(U 10:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Great! I don't know what good it is anymore, though, since I guess the PNG is large enough and more accurate... I'm still glad it works! Althepal 17:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, if you want, I can fix up the SVG to make it more accurate. It might take a while, though. (I'm a bit lazy :-) ) — Alex(U 06:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If you can fix it, that would be great. Maybe it can replace the png! Althepal 16:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Bird beaks
Hi, you said something about making alpha white in Inkscape. I looked around for it and was unable to find out how this is done. Also, if you think you can improve the bird beaks image, please do feel free to do so as also to add yourself as an additional author. Shyamal 14:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * In Inkscape, you can open the image gradient editing dialog (by going into gradient mode and then clicking the gradient node of the gradient you need to edit and then clicking Edit next to the gradient shown on top), then select the color with transparency, selecting the HSL tab, and dragging the A and L (alpha and luminance) all the way to the right, or some desired amount of luminance to remove the alpha. I'm sure you can do this, but I may play around with your image a little if I decide to. I would upload it to Wikipedia, not the Commons, you know. Good luck! Althepal 17:34, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a ton. I was all the time using only one end of the gradient setting and leaving the other end to blank which was transparent. Will use this feature on newer images. Shyamal 04:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, regarding your new comment, I am afraid I cannot work on that until the next weekend. Shyamal 02:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

White Shark
Thank you for uploading and working with my pic - I have so little patience for the aftermath of my work, I just want to get out there and shoot more! (and then I'd be stuck with the aftermath again, but oh well....) I'll try to get around to doing a user page soon, but I'm also struggling to get to work on the rest of the pics. Thanks again for all your efforts with the images, and thanks to everyone else who aided and abetted my new FP status. Cheers!Pterantula 00:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:BirdBeaks.svg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:BirdBeaks.svg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:BirdBeaks.svg fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason: Empty description page for an image on commons To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:BirdBeaks.svg, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 04:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Winvista.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Winvista.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Linksyslogo.svg has been replaced by Image:GPLLinksysLogo.png
I uploaded a GPL'd version of Linksys's logo at Image:GPLLinksysLogo.png with a proof that it is GPL'd, so your image is not valid fair use image anymore. Therefore, I must give you the warnings below. Jesse Viviano 00:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Linksyslogo.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Linksyslogo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Jesse Viviano 00:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Linksyslogo.svg
Thanks for uploading Image:Linksyslogo.svg. 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:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) 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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jesse Viviano 00:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * And just how is it that the replaced logo free? I'm sorry, but you misunderstood what was meant by "GPL Code". The image contained is not code for the program; the (R) contained in the logo is proof that it isn't free; be more careful in the future. Written proof from Linksys would be necessary to claim a logo containing registered trademarks to be GPL. Althepal 03:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If you read the proof I gave in the description for the image, you would have known that the gzipped tarball was released under the GPL. Therefore, all of the files that are extracted from it would be considered GPL'd. Linksys used to have a notice on its GPL code center stating that the files on that page were released under the GPL, and I took that as proof that the tarball I extracted the image from was under the GPL. Because that notice was removed, I then wrote up another proof. It already survived an IfD on the Commons. The image is copyrighted, but can be used under the terms of the GPL. Jesse Viviano 16:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't really care to get into an argument with you. GPL code means the program, not all individual files within the program. Listen, if that logo was GPL, then I could modify it to look exactly like the one on the website, with it still being GPL. However, the Linksys logo is not gpl, and you must understand that, especially since it contains COPYRIGHT and REGISTERED TRADEMARKS. Nowhere do they say the logo is released under the GPL, and you really must get written permission from them (which shouldn't be too hard, right?) if you are to claim that a logo which is copyright is now GPL because of your interpretation of the wording. Pending a clear, written statement from Linksys, I don't think it is correct to claim their logo is free. Althepal 18:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I made an inquire to linksys-opensource@linksys.com as to whether or not your replacement is under the GPL. Until I get a response, I don't think it would be correct to make such assumptions. Althepal 18:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Macosxlogo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Macosxlogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Os-x-leopard.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Os-x-leopard.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:07, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Tigerxlogo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Tigerxlogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Windows Vista Orb.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Vista Orb.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi! raster graphics, contrasted with vector graphics
I noticed that you chimed in on one talk page about POV & raster cf. vector graphics. Could you help me with the general idea: (1) Which is better: raster or vector graphics? (2) Which is better for working with non-digital (would one say "analog"?) photographs?

I got confused with the raster graphics article. It said that raster graphic editors had practicality with working with photographs than did vector graphics editors; but it didn't explain this practicality. Reading the vector graphics article, one is impressed with the use of vector graphics in producing sharper images. So, one wonders why bother with raster graphics. Furthermore, one notices that Paint Shop Pro handles raster graphics, while Photoshop does not. What does Corel know that Adobe does not, or vice versa? Cheers, Dogru144 16:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi. I guess you can tell from my user page that I work with both raster and vector graphics. Short answer: depending on what you want to do, the raster is better for some things (photographs), vector is better for other things (computer graphics). Long answer:

Vector graphics

 * Vector graphics are basically lines between point A and point B (with a lot of fancy effects), so there is no limit to the clarity or resolution: there are infinity points on a line.
 * Due to this, vector graphics are used for creating digital graphics (and are superior to raster graphics in graphic creation). You are drawing from scratch with vector graphics, so you can then modify anything you draw later, without any downsides.

Raster graphics

 * Raster graphics are many dots which make up an image. It has limited resolution, but since there are no individual objects, effects can be applied without respect to objects (though it is possible, and difficult, to apply effects to specific objects). This is useful for changing the contrast, color, exposure, etc of an entire image.
 * Due to this, raster graphics are the only real option for photographs, and make enhancing photographs practical. When the image is captured on a camera sensor, it can ONLY be a raster image, because photographic data isn't just a line between two points, and the camera picks up the image as many dots of color.

Raster vs Vector
If you want to draw a graphic using raster graphics, you will probably be disappointed. You cannot modify anything you drew (only draw-over), you cannot get unlimited resolution, etc. But you cannot use vector graphics to modify photos, since photos are raster, and that is the way they store the most information as it was. Raster graphics editors let you edit pictures, vector editors let you make specific changes to already-vector graphics.

Analog photo vs digital photo: raster or vector?
A photo from a film camera only becomes a raster or vector file once it is put onto the computer. Scanners cannot convert photographic data into vectors, rather it produces a sheet of dots which make up the image. It would be impossible for a scanner to convert a photo into an infinitely detailed and large vector image. So there is no real way to edit even film photos with vector graphics editors, and there would be no benefit, since it is the raster editor which allows for general enhancements and control of modifying groups of dots. The only time you could use any photo in a vector graphics editor is after a program has read the photo and created a vector approximation (which would look similar to a cartoon, or at least not produce something that looks like a real photo with millions of colors, since that would take way too long and produce an extremely large file, with no real benifit). After being a vector-cartoon approximation of the original photo, elements (like a whole person) can be moved from place to place or made to look huge or small, without loss of sharpness. Of course, when you make it big, you will notice less information per area of the image.

Corel PSP vs Adobe CS3
Both programs work with raster graphics, and Adobe also works with vector. Regarding raster, this makes it so both programs can fine tune the white balance, lighting, etc of a picture, as well as "removing" an object (group of dots) from the photo or making other effects with dot-manipulation. For drawing graphics (like a paint brush), corel draws in dots, so you can't later just delete that drawing. But in Adobe, where extra drawing is done as vector art, those things can late be rescaled, moved, or removed.

Bottom line already!
Well, for editing photos, you need and can best use a raster graphics editor, and for making drawings, vector graphics editors are best. Althepal

This is fantastic
Thanks, Althepal. This far and away clarifies things, especially re the film photos matter. I'm looking to improve some film photos. I see the inherent limitations in putting them into computer format. I've been relieved that some photo labs have been able to put my negatives into CD disks that have had better resolution than the discs from generic mail-away labs. -Although it is not perfect; and it does come at a higher price.

Would I be out of line to cut and paste some of this into the articles in question, for the greater audience? You explained things far more completely than the articles did. Cheers. Dogru144 04:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure
You can use anything I wrote in any articles. Just make sure you check for spelling, logical inconsistencies, repetition with other parts of the article (or myself), etc. Hey, by the way, if you have any prints (like 8x10) of your film photos and can find a scanner which produces high quality scans like this Canon scanner which goes up to almost 50 megapixels, you can then put the scanned files yourself onto DVDs. (And let me tell you, 50 MP should be enough for a large mural!) Let me ask you, after you get digital copies, do you intend to do post-processing, or just keep archives/make prints? Althepal 18:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

New version of "white shark"
Haya, how goes it? I just did another edit of the white shark Featured Pic: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pterantula/226731799/in/photostream/ Let me know what you think, and if you think we could/should replace the existing one here? Thx mucho, cheers Pterantula 20:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, this picture seems to take away the tropical water feel from the picture, while giving a more accurate color of the shark itself. I personally prefer the current one. It looks much richer and tropical. BTW: Why isn't your featured picture as the head picture in the article, replaced by the B/W? Althepal 18:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought it was? It was the last time I looked, and I didn't change anything myself.... Pterantula 18:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:IPhoneclean.png
Thanks for uploading Image:IPhoneclean.png. I noticed 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:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) 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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. LARA ♥LOVE  05:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

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

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bahamaslogo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Bahamaslogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Oulogob.svg
Thanks for uploading Image:Oulogob.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Norton07.jpg Image Deletion
Hi! You proposed that Image:Norton07.jpg be deleted because it is no longer relevant. I would have to disagree with that. It's purpose it to show the differences amongst recent versions of Norton Internet Security - after all, there is even a level 2 heading for the specific version, so why not have a screenshot to go with it? It aids the reader about understanding the product. Cooldude7273 11:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's so important. Except for very popular programs (eg Windows) where there are both a significant number of people using the old version and there is a significant difference, I don't think that old versions of the program significantly contribute to the article. Also, discussing version history isn't enough to include fair use images of old versions (I only, and even then occasionally, see this happening on articles about Free Software). This is my view, but perhaps a consensus of people discussing this on the Norton Internet Security article can settle this. Allow me to move this discussion there (incorporated). I will only modify your post so it makes sense there, but if you don't want this, you can remove it. Althepal 17:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Heliconfiltericon.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Heliconfiltericon.png. I notice the image 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. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 non-free media 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. Rettetast 21:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)