User talk:Bkell/March 2008 through August 2008

Publica Facility images
Well China Youth Daily says its an "independently operated central government news media" so I took that as a meaning that its a "public" piece. Would Brand be the better reason? And according to the file links, Image:Cdu pcp pt.jpg was the logo of a coalition of parties in the elections, so it doesn't have an independent page and should be covered on the election page. Probably better as an Org though.  MBisanz  talk 08:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The rationales that were there said the images were being used to identify a "public facility", such as "a road, airport, station, city, neighborhood, or the like". A newspaper and a political party do not seem to fit into that category. Non-free use rationales have to make sense. —Bkell (talk) 12:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Good point. I fixed the China one and found a real source for it.  Another user fixed the CDU one.   MBisanz  talk 18:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Dogs Life Hints
Ok, I created a page called Dogs Life hints, but it was deleted, and on my talk page it said that i could recreate the page but put a link to Dogs Life. I did this but it got deleted again. why does it do this?Melon247 (talk) 15:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, I think there was a misunderstanding. Enric Naval said, "You should try to add an external link to Dogs Life pointing to a non-wikipedia article that contains a game guide/cheats/FAQ etc." What he meant was that you can edit the Dogs Life article and add a link at the bottom to a page somewhere else on the Internet that gives a game guide. You might want to take a look at What Wikipedia is not, especially the section called Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook. Let me know if you need help or have more questions. —Bkell (talk) 15:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Xexakis.jpg
Hi there! I uploaded the Xexakis.jpg. The Hellenic Authors' Society is a nonprofit organization dedicated, among other things, to the promotion of Modern Greek Literature abroad. As it is, there exists no explicit copyright notice within the website, but I happen to know that all information included in the website can be freely used, provided that the use serves the goals of the organization stated above. Do you have any suggestions on how I could alter the copyright information of the image? Thank you in advance. Odikuas (talk) 23:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Please see my response at Possibly unfree images/2008 March 12. Let's continue the conversation there so that it's more visible to other editors who may be interested in the discussion. —Bkell (talk) 23:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Iraqi BRDM-2 picture
Hello.

I contacted the Jim Webster who runs the JED site. I asked him where the pictures came from and he said that they came from a contact in the USMC. Therefore now I'm positive this can posted here as a free picture.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 11:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Digital Youth.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Digital Youth.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. BJBot (talk) 04:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Copied to User talk:T1chengM. —Bkell (talk) 04:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Pictures wanted?
Are there any pictures of hamsters doing anything that are needed? I'm getting quite good at taking photo's of Hammy (even if I do say so myself.)Melon247 (talk) 15:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Pakistan road images
I came across this image, which is blatantly copied from a Flickr image. I then checked the uploader's other contribs and found an obviously related account. Reason I bring this up with you is this edit you made to one of the images. Like the first one it is from Flickr, and these two accounts are obviously uploading bad files and protecting them. Any thoughts?--Nilfanion (talk) 20:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Well, the removal of an entry from PUI can be safely reverted (I've done so). The edit I made to Image:835344921 3ab3720b5c b.jpg was based on a good-faith assumption that the tag was accurate; if you believe the uploader is not the copyright holder, feel free bring up your concerns at WP:PUI. I didn't really investigate the claim of authorship very thoroughly—I just saw the  tag and concluded that the "no source" tag was inappropriate, since a source was claimed.
 * In cases where I suspect a user has been uploading images copied from somewhere else, I try to find the original images if possible (as you've done with the Flickr image). If I can't find the image outside Wikipedia, but from the uploader's contributions I feel that the image is likely to be a copyright infringement, then I list it at PUI with an explanation and as much evidence as I can. Generally, however, if I can't find the image outside Wikipedia despite a lot of searching, and it seems reasonable that the uploader could have created the image, I assume good faith and leave it alone, even if all the other images uploaded by that user were taken from somewhere else. (You might have a different opinion about such situations, but be careful about making accusations of copyright infringement if the only thing you're going on is a hunch.) Sometimes I also think it might be helpful to leave a note on the uploader's talk page; there are some pre-written warning templates for purposes like this, such as.
 * If you are concerned that two accounts are owned by the same person, or by two different people each of whose primary purpose is to support the other, you might take a look at Sock puppetry, but be careful with this too—it's easy to hurt feelings if you make baseless accusations. I've never been involved with any sock puppet proceedings, so I'm not too sure how they work. —Bkell (talk) 02:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There's no real value to making to making a sock determination - there isn't disruption being caused by the multiple accounts (and I'm not sure that they are the same). Thanks for clarifying what went on with the image you edited.
 * Personally, if these images were on Commons: I'd already have deleted the satellite pics and images with watermarking and given the user(s) a final warning (the pictures taken from the road surface by Ahsaniqbal are probably his). I'd do the same under WP:CSD here, but I'm not quite confident enough with the situation to do so. I'll probably do that once the images on IFD/PUI have gone through that system.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

PNG
Hm. So I totally understand what you mean about going from Image:AND1logo.jpg to Image:AND1_logo.png, a case where converting the image not only clears it up, but also reduces the size. Though in that case, there's not much clearing up to be done :) But for an image like that, cleaning it up is easy.

I don't quite know what you mean, though, when it comes to something like Image:Alexander_Luthor_Earth_3.png. Should that image just stay JPG? Recreating it would be .. maybe not impossible, but certainly not within the scope of Wikipedia. And what about Image:Allegro-screen.jpg? Should that be screen-captured directly to PNG?

I'm really not much of a graphics person. I kinda know my way around Photoshop - on a medium to beginner-medium level. So any help you can give will expand my awareness, and hopefully help the encyclopedia as well =D

Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think Image:Alexander Luthor Earth 3.png could have probably just stayed JPEG, especially if it was actually scanned from a comic. Scanned images are usually OK to keep as JPEGs, because of the minor random variations of color introduced by the imperfections of the scanner. Screenshots of Web pages, though, such as Image:Allegro-screen.jpg, should be recaptured (if possible) directly to PNG, so that the image never goes through the JPEG process. Image quality is always irretrievably reduced when an image is saved as a JPEG (because JPEG uses lossy compression), so once an image has been saved as a JPEG it's impossible to get exactly the original image back. Usually it's not that big of a deal for photographs, which is what JPEG was designed for, but it can really be noticeable for non-photographic images. —Bkell (talk) 05:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I think I see what you mean. So if I run across another Luthor3 image, should I just remove the ShouldBePNG and leave it alone?  And would you check the latest two I did - Image:Scouting Aruba logo.png‎ and Image:Aquafina logo.png‎ - and see if I'm doing better? Or should I just leave this for the experts? =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Those look fine. I see you're adding transparent backgrounds, too, which can actually be a good reason to convert to PNG (since JPEG doesn't support transparency). As for similar comic book images, if you find them and they look scanned, you're probably safe in removing the tag. —Bkell (talk) 02:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:TAGAP_Pills
Hi. I noticed that you deleted this image with the explanation not a screenshot of a Web page. It is an image from a webpage, the url is here. Can I re-upload the image? --Simpsons fan 66 04:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The image is not a screenshot of a Web page. A screenshot of a Web page is an image which shows a Web page (like Image:Google (2008).jpg). This is an image which shows some pills from a video game. Pills from a video game are not Web pages, and an image showing pills from a video game is not a screenshot of a Web page. Notice the bottom of the tag, where it says, "This tag is not appropriate for images and media found on websites; it should be used for screenshots of websites only." You can upload the image again, but if you do, you need to make sure you have a copyright tag which makes sense. Maybe  would be appropriate? —Bkell (talk) 04:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Will do. By the way, usually when someone leaves a message on your talk page, you then reply on their talk page, not your own. --Simpsons fan 66 01:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * That breaks up the conversation, though, so it's hard for others who may come along later to follow the conversation and figure out what happened. You may notice that I have a big blue "Guidelines" box at the top of this talk page which says that if you leave a message here, I will reply here. —Bkell (talk) 05:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:SoltyRei characters.png
I was a little confused as to which template to use when I uploaded this picture as I had taken a snapshot of a website to get it and didn't know if such a picture is available elsewhere. If you had informed me that I used the incorrect template, I would have gladly changed it. Would you mind undoing the deletion? That was the only problem with the image right? --Eruhildo (talk) 05:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * It's been restored. I'm sorry if I appeared hasty in my deletion, but there were hundreds of images in Category:Screenshots of web pages that were not images showing Web pages but rather images showing people or objects or airplanes or whatever, and I'm trying to take care of all of them. Be sure to read the text of the tag you're applying to an image to see if it makes sense. Notice that the tag claims that the image is to be used "for identification and critical commentary relating to the website in question" (i.e., the website itself, not whatever is being described on the website); and at the bottom it says, "This tag is not appropriate for images and media found on websites; it should be used for screenshots of websites only." Perhaps  would be appropriate? —Bkell (talk) 13:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much. I never seen the Non-free character template before - usually I use the television screenshot one, but I didn't know if this was ever even on video or anything. I've changed it to the character one now. I understand it must be a pain going through so many images with the wrong tag. Sorry if I appeared rude. --Eruhildo (talk) 14:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No, you weren't rude at all. I'm glad we got this figured out. —Bkell (talk) 16:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment on image deletion
I've seen that you've deleted several images per I7 violations, which is in the long term appropriate, but please note that there is supposed to be a grace period for people to correct it: per WP:CSD for I7, the image uploaded should be notified first, and if not corrected 48hrs after that, then the image can be deleted. Images that I've seen you delete lack any notification (including any tags to indicate a bad copyright) so speedy deleteion without notification is inappropriate. Thanks. --MASEM 13:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Doesn't I7 say, "Non-free images or media with a clearly invalid fair-use tag (such as a  tag on a photograph of a mascot) may be deleted at any time"? —Bkell (talk) 13:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:RosedaleCanda.JPG
Speaking of comments on image deletions, I replied. If you'd prefer to delete it until confirmation can be established, I certainly won't object or take offence; a short delay without an image never hurts anyone, and hence you have my permission to delete (for CSD G7) if you feel that's preferable in the short term. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 15:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't want the image to be deleted, since it appears that it's free somehow; I just want the copyright situation cleared up. —Bkell (talk) 15:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Deleted images as "not screenshots"
You deleted a number of my image contributions as "I7: Invalid justification given for non-free image: clearly invalid fair-use tag [Non-free web screenshot]: this is not a screenshot of a Web page"

These are:
 * 12:13, 3 April 2008 Bkell (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:EulaliaBourne.gif" ‎ (I7: Invalid justification given for non-free image: clearly invalid fair-use tag [Non-free web screenshot]: this is not a screenshot of a Web page)
 * 12:13, 3 April 2008 Bkell (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Daniel C. Jackling.gif" ‎ (I7: Invalid justification given for non-free image: clearly invalid fair-use tag...: this is not a screenshot of a Web page)
 * 12:13, 3 April 2008 Bkell (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Meteor Crater Museumjpeg.jpeg" ‎ (I7: Invalid justification given for non-free image: clearly invalid fair-use tag...: this is not a screenshot of a Web page)
 * 12:27, 3 April 2008 Bkell (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Jackling House.jpg" ‎ (I7: Invalid justification given for non-free image: clearly invalid fair-use tag...: this is not a screenshot of a Web page)
 * 12:27, 3 April 2008 Bkell (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Sasco,AZ.jpg" ‎ (I7: Invalid justification given for non-free image: clearly invalid fair-use tag : this is not a screenshot of a Web page)
 * 12:26, 3 April 2008 Bkell (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Meteorite Museum.jpg" ‎ (I7: Invalid justification given for non-free image: clearly invalid fair-use tag : this is not a screenshot of a Web page)
 * 12:25, 3 April 2008 Bkell (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Nininger-portrait.jpg" ‎ (I7: Invalid justification given for non-free image: clearly invalid fair-use tag : this is not a screenshot of a Web page)

However, all but one of these seem to fit the WP definition of Screenshot: "Screenshot: Outputting the entire screen in a common bitmap image format such as BMP, PNG, or JPEG."

See, for example, http://cowpuncher.library.arizona.edu/images/eulalia.gif, which I uploaded as "Image:EulaliaBourne.gif" You will note that the entire content of this page is the image I uploaded. Please tell me how this differs from the definition of "screenshot" I just quoted from Wikipedia.

If you have a preferred copyright tag for historic photos, I'd be happy to substitute that. However, of the menu of choices at Special:Upload this appeared to match closely. I'm certainly making a good-faith effort to comply with the WP fair-use rules, and it seems discourteous to delete the contributions without offering the uploader a chance to reply.

TIA for your help in straightening this out -- Pete Tillman (talk) 16:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Please have a look at Template:Non-free web screenshot. Note that it claims that the image in question is a screenshot of a Web page (not an image found on a Web page), and that the image is to be used "for identification and critical commentary relating to the website in question". Moreover, note the bold text at the bottom: "This tag is not appropriate for images and media found on websites; it should be used for screenshots of websites only." As an example, Image:Google (2008).jpg is a screenshot of a Web page. A screenshot of a Web page is not just an image which happens to be on a Web page.
 * The images I uploaded were not images of Web pages, which is what the tag is for. The images you listed are photos of a woman, a man, a building, another building, a third building, a museum, and another man. Women, men, buildings, and museums are not Web pages.
 * I am sorry if my actions seem discourteous; there are many images in Category:Screenshots of web pages which are incorrectly tagged, and I am trying to fix this problem. I can restore these images if you like, as long as you will change the tags to a different non-free copyright tag which accurately describes the image. You may want, though it says that the photo "depicts a non-reproducible historic event". If none of the tags seem to be a good fit, you can use . Don't forget that you also need to include a non-free use rationale for every use of a non-free image in an article. Please let me know if I can help or if you have any questions. —Bkell (talk) 17:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your detailed reply. I agree that the screen-shot tag isn't a very good fit, but none of the "canned" copyright tags I've found really seem to fit very well. I'll try the you suggested, or post a query at the help board. It does seem clear that what I'm trying to do is really fair use. A couple of these photos are probably old enough to be public-domain, but I can't document that.


 * Yes, please restore these, and I'll fix the copyright tags, and perhaps elaborate the FUR statements. I haven't done many fair-use images yet, and the documentation for WP fair use is confusing! Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 19:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't bother restoring "Image:Jackling House.jpg", as there's a free image available. Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 22:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, they've all been restored, except Image:Jackling House.jpg. —Bkell (talk) 22:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks -- I'll fix the tags. Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 03:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use reduce on Image:RickRoll.jpg
I have reverted to the original version of Image:RickRoll.jpg, which you requested downscaling in accordance with Fair use reduce. The problem with the smaller version is that it makes the text in the image completely illegible. I believe you and Melesse may be misinterpreting the "low resolution" requirement of fair use. For a discussion, see Template talk:Non-free reduce. In this particular case, the video screen shot is already degraded, so its number of pixels is not relevant, and the text cannot be "reduced" without destroying its usefulness. Please let me know if you have any questions / comments. Thanks. &mdash;dgies tc 20:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I tagged the image with because I don't think there is any reason to include that image at a size of 1004×578 pixels in an article, so the resolution seems unnecessarily large for its use on Wikipedia. I can easily read the text at a size of 640×368 pixels (and could do even better if the image were a PNG rather than a JPEG). Granted, the small 350×201 image that Melesse uploaded may be too small, but I don't see any justification for keeping the 1004×578 version. —Bkell (talk) 20:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean to imply "images with text shall never be reduced", but the previous version was a bit much. If you want 640px that's fine by me. &mdash;dgies tc 21:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

How to: WIkipedia Images
I don't know how to scale down images on Wikipedia. The userboxes on my page are gigantic and I don't knowhow to scale them down because they take up too much room. Please respond,--RayquazaDialgaWeird2210 (talk) 13:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Take a look at Picture tutorial. Also, please don't spam a bunch of users' talk pages with the same question. If you would like to ask many users the same thing, you might want to post it at the Help desk. —Bkell (talk) 15:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing to gain from it
Hello there. I learn that you're among those users that oppose the usage fair use pics because it contradicts that goal of Wikipedia. Well let me tell you something. I think Wikipedia should only be used for educational purposes. The idea to come up with those so-called free images which can be applied for commercial purpose is probably just pointless. I don't businesses and companies around would turn to Wikipedia for props since most of them have their own photographers to do the job. This means those free pics are not much different from those fair use ones. Also, there's probably nothing users can gain for uploading them. 124.106.200.62 (talk) 14:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You are welcome to start your own encyclopedia with your own goals. However, the goals of Wikipedia, as described by the five pillars, include the goal to be an encyclopedia of free content that anyone can use for any purpose. You may also want to read The Case for Free Use: Reasons Not to Use a Creative Commons -NC License. Wikipedia allows commercial use not just so that big corporations can use the content (which, as you've pointed out, probably isn't that important), but so that people can use bits and pieces from Wikipedia on their own Web sites (even if they're making money from banner ads or something), and so that people can put copies of Wikipedia on DVDs and sell them (as was done with the German Wikipedia), and so that our content is compatible with other projects which allow commercial use (such as Linux). —Bkell (talk) 16:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Elevator industry executive, technical, and management recruiting firm / staffing firm
Sorry your comments got lost, but I was desperately trying to close it. If you want them back in the discussion, I'll gladly restore them for you. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:16, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem. They weren't that important. —Bkell (talk) 20:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of countries by compactness
I have nominated List of countries by compactness, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/List of countries by compactness. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Oren0 (talk) 07:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Evan Thomas image
Hi, thanks for your message about my Evan Thomas image.

I've never been a hardcore Wikipedian so I didn't fully understand what you were suggesting I do (no need to re-explain--I'll reread it later). In any case, here's what happened with that image. It's from the University of Virginia law school. I e-mailed them to ask if I could use it for Wikipedia and here's the exact text of our email correspondence where they say I can use it, but don't credit them:

Subject: Re: attn: webmaster

From: Law Webmaster

Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:27:36 -0500

To: Buddhadev Chakraborty

X-Account-Key: account3

X-UIDL: GmailId10a428a8e781f800

X-Mozilla-Status: 0011

X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000

X-Gmail-Received: 2ac732edbb61650cd1a8702275a846b6b08ea1b0

Delivered-To: ************@gmail.com

Received: by 10.70.61.9 with SMTP id j9cs30542wxa; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 12:27:58 -0800 (PST)

Received: by 10.70.24.2 with SMTP id 2mr6281207wxx; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 12:27:57 -0800 (PST)

Return-Path:

Received: from law6.law.virginia.edu (law6.law.Virginia.EDU [128.143.28.135]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id h8si2088010wxd.2006.03.28.12.27.55; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 12:27:57 -0800 (PST)

Received-SPF: pass (gmail.com: best guess record for domain of webmaster@law.virginia.edu designates 128.143.28.135 as permitted sender)

Received: from Spooler by law6.law.virginia.edu (Mercury/32 v4.01b) ID MO00022A; 28 Mar 2006 15:27:57 -0500

Received: from spooler by law6.law.virginia.edu (Mercury/32 v4.01b); 28 Mar 2006 15:27:42 -0500

Received: from stf-mmw3v-wxp.law.virginia.edu (137.54.151.167) by law6.law.virginia.edu (Mercury/32 v4.01b) ID MG000227; 28 Mar 2006 15:27:36 -0500

Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060328152715.03264138@law6.law.virginia.edu>

X-Sender: webmaster@law6.law.virginia.edu (Unverified)

X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1

In-Reply-To: <****************@gmail.com>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Feel free to use it, but don't credit us.

Thanks,

Mary

At 07:50 PM 3/25/2006 -0800, you wrote:

> Dear Webmaster:

>

> May I use the picture of Evan Thomas on the UVA law school page? I'm

> trying to write a wikipedia.com article about him. Here's the page with

> the photo I'm talking about:

> http://www.law.virginia.edu/home2002/html/news/2003_spr/media_terror.htm

>

> Please let me know.

>

> Thanks,

> Buddhadev

What's the best thing to do for a situation like that? Thanks!

Zongalt (talk) 20:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd suggest you take a look at Requesting copyright permission for details about what kind of permission needs to be obtained and suggested ways of requesting it. You need to request this permission from whoever holds the copyright to the image. Perhaps "don't credit us" means that they do not hold the copyright? Anyway, you need to obtain an agreement that the image is licensed under a suitable free license, which allows not just Wikipedia but anyone to use the image for any purpose, including commercial uses. If you receive such an agreement, you can forward the e-mail to "permissions-commons AT wikimedia DOT org", as explained in the section called "When permission is confirmed". If you have more questions, let me know. —Bkell (talk) 21:41, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Omaha
With support from a number of editors, WikiProject Omaha is now live. Feel free to add your name to the list of editors and to add one of the spiffy templates to your user page. There is a list of open tasks and a resource list you can contribute to or help with, as well! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to working with you to make WikiProject Omaha a success. • Freechild   'sup?   17:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

PUI LIsted images
OK then... Feel free to close the PUI entries... Tagged as fair-use, so no contest :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes you introduced today in Diode Modeling
I do not know what kind of browser you are using but most of the changes you introduced today look awfull. Are you aware of that? TomyDuby (talk) 20:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * In what way do they look awful? If you don't like variables in running text to be rendered as images, you can change your settings (go to "my preferences" at the top of any Wikipedia page, go to the "Math" tab, and choose "HTML if very simple or else PNG" or "HTML if possible or else PNG"). —Bkell (talk) 21:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, if you currently have "HTML if possible or else PNG" chosen, try changing it to "HTML if very simple or else PNG". I think the "HTML if possible" setting looks awful. —Bkell (talk) 21:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank You :)
Thanks for deleting the page. I intended to look up 'William Hicks' but mistyped and searched for 'Wiliam Hicks' (with one 'l'). Thanks again!

-Peace Out!-

 mÆniac  Ask! 02:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. —Bkell (talk) 02:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Real quick Image:Midway chicago.png
Image:Midway chicago.png, I am not much of a image maniac, so I have no idea what this bad JPEG thing means. Does it have to do with the fact that image was saved in .png instead of .jpeg just curious, before I attempt to correct it or make a new one. -Marcusmax (talk) 02:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The JPEG format is a good format for photographs, but a bad format for maps, charts, diagrams, line art, text, and other images with sharp, well-defined edges and big blocks of solid colors. The reason is that JPEG uses lossy compression, which throws away some of the information in the original picture and introduces compression artifacts into the image. These artifacts are usually invisible to the human eye in photographs, but are very noticeable as "splotches" or "fuzz" in images with sharp edges and large blocks of solid colors. (For example, the "fuzz" is noticeable around the lines in Image:Adsorption Isotherms (Langmuir red & BET green.JPG.) Moreover, if a JPEG image is edited and resaved in the JPEG format, information is lost again, making the image quality even worse.
 * The PNG format uses a lossless compression technique, so no information is lost during compression and the image remains as clear and sharp as when it was first created. Its compression technique also works better for images with large blocks of solid colors, so the resulting file size for such images will be smaller than if they had been saved in the JPEG format. On the other hand, PNG compression does not work well for photographs, which have many shades of various colors and vague boundaries, so JPEG is still best for photographs.
 * You may wish to read Preparing images for upload for more information. SVG is a third format which is usually best for drawings.
 * In this particular instance, Image:Midway chicago.png was originally saved in the JPEG format (and uploaded as Image:Midway chicago.jpg), which is inappropriate for a simple drawing such as a map. For this reason I tagged it with the template, to request a replacement image in the PNG or SVG formats. Some time later 718 Bot uploaded an automatically generated PNG version as a replacement (this PNG version is Image:Midway chicago.png). The complete file history of the old JPEG image was copied into the image description page to preserve continuity, and that's why you see "badJPEG" on the PNG description page. Note that the  tag does not actually exist on the PNG description page. A tag which does exist on the PNG description page is the  tag, which was automatically placed there by 718 Bot, because simply converting an image from JPEG to PNG (as was done by 718 Bot) does not remove the compression artifacts which were originally introduced into the image during the process of JPEG compression.
 * This is a fairly complicated explanation, so if you're still confused, please let me know. —Bkell (talk) 05:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps that explanation missed the entire point of your question. If your concern is that the current image does not display properly in thumbnails, then what you are seeing is a problem in the MediaWiki software which runs Wikipedia. Apparently thumbnails cannot be generated for PNG images which have more than 12.5 million pixels, and Image:Midway chicago.png is an absolutely enormous PNG image (6,600 × 5,100 pixels, for a total of almost 34 million pixels). So in theory a PNG image is more appropriate than a JPEG here, but due to the sheer size of the image and the limitations of the software running Wikipedia, the JPEG version is probably best for the time being. I've changed the image in the Chicago Midway International Airport article back to the JPEG version so that the thumbnail displays. If the MediaWiki problem is ever fixed, then we can move to the PNG version. —Bkell (talk) 05:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

URL
Hi. Its kinda funny but I've probably uploaded more images with url links than anybody on english wikipedia. SOme of my older images however did not have them. If you are going through Argentine images please note that pre 1988 photos are publid domain and many are currently under fair use when unnecessary. Thanks The Bald One      White cat 13:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)