User talk:Amejia1

File permission problem with File:Avplay sintel snapshot.png
Thanks for uploading File:Avplay sintel snapshot.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 23:06, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Libav page
You may see that I reverted your changes in the Libav page. I did a full revert of all your changes and added new citations for some of the information you had specifically reverted. The libavcodec page should be merged IMO. It's out of date anyway. If you have some problem with some of the information, use better edit summaries when you make your changes or start a discussion in the talk page please. Amejia1 (talk) 16:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I’m afraid someone who’s made an account here just to make a (ludicrous) Libav article is not in a position to lecture me on editing. ¦ Reisio (talk) 18:06, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Libav is moving in a different direction without any regard to what FFmpeg is doing. FFmpeg is continuing to merge practically all code that is committed to the Libav codebase (libavresample serves as a great example to this). Google recognizes Libav as their own project (this is notable when Libav succeeded in getting accepted into the Google Summer of Code this year, yet FFmpeg failed). Of late, the main maintainer of libavfilter has implemented his own methods of supporting various routines done in libavfilter (research the buffersink filter). I did the renaming of the ffmpeg page to ffmpeg/libav to at least acknowledge that libav and ffmpeg have somewhat similar codebase. This isn't true however. Libav has their own developers, their own mailing lists, their own codebase, and their own methodology of what is suitable to go into the libav codebase. They merit their own wikipedia page. Amejia1 (talk) 21:21, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * If I didn’t see Libav as a project in its own right, I would’ve marked the articule for deletion and not wasted my time removing the inaccuracies and redundancies from it. If you cite your sources and keep the information relevant you’ll have no trouble from me or anyone else. ¦ Reisio (talk) 22:49, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Avplay sintel snapshot.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Avplay sintel snapshot.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:38, 27 June 2012 (UTC)