User talk:Cohesion/Archive3

Image
I recieved a note from you regarding the photo on the Liz Kniss page. I am unsure how to proceed and would like your help in verifying its right to be used on the page. I recieved the picture directly from Liz Kniss, who owns the picture and I believe has used it on websites and other pubications. How do I authenticate this to show I have the right to use it? Thank you for your help. Dapoloplayer
 * No problem, based on that I have changed the tag on the image, Image:LizKniss.jpg see if that seems accurate to you now, it won't get deleted as is, but if something about it isn't accurate I'll be happy to help find the right tag for it. Also, if you write a comment on someone's talk page they get a message, but if you do it on the normal user page they just have to find it. So, sorry if i was slow in my response hehe :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 07:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:LocalCoimbra.png
I found the Image:LocalCoimbra.png on Coimbra's article in Portuguese Wikipedia. Link: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coimbra

Now they have another image (Imagem:LocalCoimbra.svg - in Portuguese Wikipedia), but it is very similar. If you remove the old one (Image:LocalCoimbra.png), place the new Imagem:LocalCoimbra.svg in substitution for Coimbra's article current image in English. Thank you. Elapsed 13:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip! The one on the Portuguese site is from the commons, and is freely licensed, so I replaced ours with that one like you said, the old one (which was smaller and greyscale) will get deleted, but we have the better one now! :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 19:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

hey
I deleted that because it was obviously written by someone who is biased and unable to make a coherent argument anyway. I have respect for wikipedia and its content should not be polluted by someone trying to use it as a forum for their ideological views. Sincerely, Chuck.
 * Ah, Ok, feel free to delete it again, I won't revert, it just looked like a blanking effort, when you are making good edits be sure to add why you're doing it in the edit description so people don't think you're a bad guy, hehe :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 09:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

thanks for the go ahead. i dont know how to edit the pages properly, as i rarely have a reason. this was just blatant

User 194.83.191.3
Obviously needs blocking F1 vandalism - although I can't do this. :: Kevinalewis  :  (Talk Page)  10:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

About the Liften Schwaltz Picture...
I screen-capped that image from an SNES Rom. I'm sorry about not adding a notion that I capped it.

I'm not that fluent with the advanced rules of Wikipedia yet.... :-)

-Aidepikiw0000
 * It looks like the image got deleted already, I was going to change the license to what you said, if you upload it again the correct tag for that would be Sorry, it got deleted already :( - cohesion &#9733; talk 07:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Rapid Image Tagging
Hi Cohesion. I noticed that you tagged several hundred images at Untagged Images, and in good time too! Thanks for the good work, but I have to ask&mdash;how are you tagging so quickly? I'm developing an image tagging tool, and I'm looking to see how others are working through this gigantic task. Thanks! &#126;MDD4696 00:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the complement, I had been looking at a number of little apps (mac osx) focusing around expanding the clipboard and/or copy paste functionality. None of them really seemed to work well because they had the assumption i would be copying things a lot that might change when what I really needed was a "palette" of canned messages. So, I went low tech and just made a folder with text clippings. If you aren't on mac, I don't know if windows or linux has them, I will give a brief explanation. If you select some text and drag it to your desktop it creates a small file, which when you drag it to a text area in any app is interpreted as pasting that text in at that point.


 * So, I just have that little folder sitting beside the browser with the tags with dates etc filled in, I only use it for no license and no source, and the associated edit descriptions; for the rest i manually type them in. - cohesion &#9733; talk 07:53, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:Message
Regarding your edit to this template, I just wanted to leave a note mentioning that you should use  instead of   when constructing URLs (  generates the page name with underscores and such, so spaces are handled correctly for example). For more info, check out Help:Variable. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 03:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahh, thanks for the info and the useful link :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 03:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

GSD building
This picture was given by my friend who was caretaker before he died few years ago. He was well known as photographer since 1940 which was Alton Holtman. He was nicest and sweetest man. He was my former scoutmaster and role model, I thought this picture was served as a memorial. I have no problem with making new pictures of Georgia School for the Deaf Fannin building with marker stood and city of Cave Spring on a planned trip to pay my respect for my late murdered friend's grave in Cave Spring. I will make more pictures and articles for Vann House, Calhoun, New Echota, Rydal, and etc. When I repost new picture with my permission, it will solve your problem. Cculber007
 * Sure, just be sure to check Image copyright tags and add them when you upload it. I probably won't personally notice when you upload, it's just that when there is no tag it gets flagged as needing attention, and someone else will probably notice :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 05:55, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Copyright on image of "Poverty Band"
I took the image and am happy to release it into the public domain. I spent ten minutes trying to work out who to apply the tagb, but it's not explained clearly enough. If you'd like to add the tag then you're more than welcome. Best wishes. User:Matt.whitby
 * Cool, thanks for the reply, I tagged it as public domain already and it's not in danger of being deleted anymore :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 07:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Manfred
Thanks. I did some mess due for exaggerated enthusiasm at my first Wikipedia stage. See you soon. Attilios

Re: Image autotagger
Hello, I was testing the autotagger you made, looks like it might be good! Anyway, tags like don't have the brackets around them, so they don't actually insert the template, just the word albumcover. Is this because it's some intermediate phase? Just wondering. I looked at the code and I guess I could just add the brackets around every tag, but if you are going to programmatically add brackets for all tags in one line somehow that is beyond what i can do in js ;) - cohesion &#9733; talk 20:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I've fixed the bug, thanks for pointing that out. &#126;MDD4696 22:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Now the frequently used tags don't work because they already have the brackets and are getting them double. I like the list w/o brackets though :D Sorry to be so annoying, I might start really using this though :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 00:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, it's not a problem at all. The only frustrating thing is that I won't have any time to work on the script until tomorrow night, so I can't make all of the changes I have lined up. If you have any more issues however, I'm all ears. Thanks! &#126;MDD4696 03:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm in no hurry either, I actually did find something else though. A lot of times there is an image in the list of things to be tagged that is actually already tagged, but it stays on the list of the autotagger b/c it knows it hasn't tagged it yet, it would be cool to be able to delete them from the list, or mark them complete somehow. - cohesion &#9733; talk 03:32, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

COTW Project
You voted for Aeronautics, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 19:26, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

BCYoung.jpg
You changed the Public Domain tag to PD-Old on this image. This is a minor point, but Benjamin Champney died in 1907 (99 years ago). The photograph came from his book, published in 1900. Since the photograph was of Champney as a young man, we can presume that the photographer has been dead for 100 years, but we can't be certain. It seems this is a very gray area. In the US, the image is clearly in the Public Domain. Shouldn't the tag remain just PD? I'm just trying to understand what tags are appropriate. JJ 17:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize it was such a close call, I have changed the tag to now. The generic  tag is deprecated, so that's why I am not using it. People have decided it's better to use more specific tags for PD images. they are actually listed on the Template:PD if you wanted to look at them. Does that new tag seem right to you? If not feel free to change it and/or let me know whatever you want :D  - cohesion &#9733; talk 22:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * PD-US is fine. Thanks.  JJ 22:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Battledroid sketch.jpg
I wasn't the one to upload that picture, but I think we can safely say that it was a fan drawn sketch by Pablo Hidalgo. I don't know enough about U.S. copyright law to know if that qualifies as a reproduction of the original which is copyright LucasFilm. If so we could probably claim fair use as it is an illustration of the topic. I'm not aware wether mister Hidalgo was contacted before upload, but it would be nice to get his permission too. Shinobu 00:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would assume the copyright falls to the person that drew it, which I also think is probably Pablo Hidalgo from . I don't think that's who uploaded it though, and unless Pablo licenses the drawing under something compatible with GFDL we probably can't keep it. If you want to email him or something that would be cool :D You can point him to the gfdl page, he could also do it under the creative commons by-sa-2.5 if he wanted, which is here. Yeah, It's actually only Pablo's permission I'm concerned with at all though, since it's his drawing and he might not be ok with it being on wikipedia. - cohesion &#9733; talk 01:31, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

How's the following: Dear Pablo Hidalgo,

Someone uploaded your drawing of a Star Wars battle droid to Wikipedia.

Since you are the creator of the drawing, we cannot keep it on Wikipedia without your express permission. Since the image was not tagged there is no way for us to know whether you agree with its use on Wikipedia and therefore the image will soon be removed.

However, if possible, we would like to keep the picture. Therefore we politely ask you for your permission to use the drawing on Wikipedia. If you wish, you could also license it under the GFDL or a Creative Commons license. We would be most grateful and will make sure you are properly attributed as the creator of the drawing.

You can contact me by leaving a message on my "talk page":

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Gerbrant&action=edit&section=new

You can of course also contact me by e-mail.

Sincerely yours, And then our names and/or Wikipedia user names and/or nicks? Shinobu 03:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That's pretty good! We actually don't just need his permission on wikipedia though, if he only gives that the tag is Template:permission which you can see it sorta scary. It needs to be licensed under something GFDL compatible, and permission just to use it only on wikipedia isn't compatible :( Anyway, I hope he says yes, if you do email him, delete the tag on it and mention you are asking for licensing changes on the image talk page so it won't get deleted in the meantime :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 03:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Hm. You're right. We'll need to take that into account, so we would need to change it: Dear Pablo Hidalgo,

Someone uploaded your drawing of a Star Wars battle droid to Wikipedia.

Since you are the creator of the drawing, we cannot keep it on Wikipedia without your express permission. Since the image was not tagged there is no way for us to know whether you agree with its use on Wikipedia and therefore the image will soon be removed.

However, if possible, we would like to keep the picture. Therefore we politely ask you to license the drawing under the GFDL or another free license as described at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags#Free_licenses, e.g. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/, so that we can continue using the drawing on Wikipedia. We would be most grateful and will make sure you are properly attributed as the creator of the drawing.

However, before you give permission, please be aware that such free licenses allow for any reuse, including commercial and derivative reuse, without your permission. If you are not okay with that, than don't release the drawing under a free license - instead inform us to remove the drawing.

You can contact me by leaving a message on my "talk page":

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Gerbrant&action=edit&section=new

You can of course also contact me by e-mail.

Sincerely yours, Feel free to make those corrections and changes as you see fit. If the message is satisfactury to both of us, I'll mail it to mister Hidalgo. Shinobu 20:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Yep, looks good to me :) Even if it didn't nothing is stopping you from emailing him though hehe. Also, there is a project page about these sorts of letters if you find yourself doing it a lot, I know wikipedia could probably use it. Anyway, if you want to edit the letters at Boilerplate request for permission I'm sure they could use your input also, there aren't enough letters there really. Anyway, looks great to me, thanks for going to all this trouble to email him! - cohesion &#9733; talk 22:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I corrected a typo and sent it. I hope it will reach mister Hidalgo. In the meantime, I put a message on the image page. I was afraid that on the talk page it would go unnoticed and the image would get deleted by accident. Shinobu 02:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia Images
Hi Cohesion. I'm a mapmaker and an illustrator, in addition to being a historian. I love Wikipedia and I want to illustrate several of the articles I write, but I can never figure out this crazy tag system that Wikipedia has in terms of the GFDL. I make these diagrams and photographs myself and therefore they are copyrighted to me. I also want them to be able to be used on Wikipedia. But I don't want to just release the copyright into the public domain and make them clip art. Is there a tag that I can use to accomplish that? Thanks for your help! --John Hamer 00:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool, I was hoping you would notice the message. That was by far the best image I saw tagging lately (out of hundreds! haha) Anyway, the tags I think most people would want to use for things they create themselves are or  . You can read about the GFDL and By-Sa-2.5 and what they actually say. Also the wikipedia article on GFDL is good. I won't sugar coat this for you though, either or these licenses will permit people to copy your images in locations other than wikipedia, and even use them in pursuits and products that they may profit from. In fact it's almost a certainty that About.com will reproduce the articles, and sometimes images for their site. What they are required to do however is say where they got the images, and license the work under a similar license. For example, microsoft could not take your image and use it in encarta unless they licensed encarta under the GFDL (which they will never do) as well as crediting the creator of the image (also they won't do). Anyway, I hope you have enough to read, haha. I hope you decide to use a free license, but I can understand people not wanting to for a variety of reasons. If you have any more questions feel free to talk-page me :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 01:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Cohesion --- I'll release the images I upload under the CC2.5 rules and tag. :) --John Hamer 03:06, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yay! I'm glad I didn't scare you away, haha. I am randomly looking at your articles because I was on your userpage, I never knew about Strangites, interesting! :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 08:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Sassoon image.
Cohesion:

I have express permission to use this image from George T. Sassoon, the photographer, specifically for use in this article. The copyright belongs to George T. Sassoon as he is not only Siegfried's son, but the person who took this picture. It is from his private collection. He granted me permission to use it in the article about his father.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:14d_sassoon_photo.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wjbean (talk • contribs)
 * Yes, it is tagged appropriately for images that we have permission to use only in wikipedia. Unfortunately these images may be deleted because they are not compatible with the GFDL. I know it might seem somewhat stupid to delete something that we have express permission to use, but under the terms of the GFDL everything on wikipedia can be reused. That is what is meant by a "free" encyclopedia. Also there are projects that are thinking about making a non-online version of wikipedia for distribution to the developing world etc. These projects have to be able to know what is gfdl compatible and what isn't. If you are in contact with the image creator maybe you can ask them to re-license the material? Here are some letters people have used in the past Boilerplate requests for permission or you can make your own of course. Anyway, I hope that explanation makes sense and you can get then re-licensed. In reality I don't know the system for deleting images tagged like that, and I certainly don't do it, so I have no estimate on when or if that image will actually get deleted.


 * Also, I don't understand your edit here this seems to contradict your view that the image should remain on wikipedia. - cohesion &#9733; talk 01:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image copyright problem with Image:Benin-1975.gif
Hi. Thanks for informing about the copyright problem. I would fix it, but I really don't know what kind of copyright would apply to a flag. If you want to fix it for me, I would be very glad.

Just a comment: As far as I know, flags are public domain, and reproducing something public domain does not change its status to copyrighted. Otherwise, I could copy Hamlet for start to finish, and claim I own copyright. Am I wrong?

Thanks again --BLOGuil 22:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * There is a specific tag for flags that come from Flags of the World website which I didn't realize at first is where that came from. I have added that tag instead. Generally though flags are not necessarily public domain. You would think they would be but often they are held in copyright or under some other license by the government or group that created them, so it's often very hard to know for sure. There is no blanket rule for flags, and flags from flags of the world are not technically GFDL compatible, but subject to the FOTW disclaimers . Flags from the US government are public domain but that is because the US government has decided that not any international law as far as I know. Anyway, hope that cleared up your question, and the image is safe :D If you have any other questions ask away :) - cohesion &#9733; talk 23:37, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Your RFA
To give you a fair shot at my support vote, I added more questions at your RFA. I felt so bad about giving you a oppose vote. :-( They are optional of course and you do not have to answer them but it could help your chances at adminship. M o e   ε  06:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem, I have answered them now. I fell for your new message trick also :( haha. - cohesion &#9733; talk 09:24, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I got these questions from my previous RFA, and I thought those questions were specific enough for true admin material to answer lucratively. Anyways, IMO, the test3/test4 should be used for newcomers that are vandalizing. Although that is sort of broad, it does seperate from the usage of the bv template which should be used on a returning/repetitive vandal or against a user making racial and homophobic slurs. Wait a second... why am I answering these questions? lol Oh well, good luck in your nomination. ;-) M o e   ε  19:35, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Bergen Norway wikipedia.jpg
You posted a notice that there was no copyright tag on, but I believe there is and always has been. Let me know if there is anything further you want me to do - it looks fine now. --Leifern 12:33, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for fixing that, the creative commons license was actually removed back in September by an anonymous user for some reason. I checked that person's other contribs and that was the only image they seemed to have messed with. Anyway, thanks for fixing it back :D - cohesion &#9733; talk 18:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image Tagging Image:Bg-1913.gif
Gee, I've uploaded that like some year ago, and totally forgot about the source, and I didn't know much about image tagging back then. I think I've downloaded it from FOTW, but I browsed to find it - it isn't there. I Googled a bit, but I didn't find the source, so you might as well delete it. I'm still not sure how is it possible for a country flag be copyrighted, though, maybe we should tag it as a "fair use"? --FlavrSavr 23:13, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I added which is just a generic "this is a flag from some place" tag, that should be ok for now, we have a lot of those pending a bigger decision on what to do with them. :D And yeah we're kinda behind in image tagging ;) - cohesion &#9733; talk 05:45, 21 February 2006 (UTC)