User talk:Doric Loon/Archive 2008

Aberdeen Grammar School
Hey, just thought I'd tell you that I deleted the image and the paragraph it was in because I couldn't find a source for the information. WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN we need to talk.  ☆ 18:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Germany Invitation
--Zeitgespenst (talk) 06:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Scotch
I don't suppose an IP check would show you were responsible for the earlier contribution would it? Anyway, we have something called a talk page if you want to discuss it. Cheers, Chrisieboy (talk) 21:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:MCS-Logo.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:MCS-Logo.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 18:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Scots-Yiddish
I have nominated Scots-Yiddish, 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/Scots-Yiddish. 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?  Ravenswing  00:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image at Central pulpit
Hey there...

The issue with the image Image:StAndrews-Rome2.jpg is that when it was uploaded several years ago, the requirement to add a specific license was not as strict as it is now. At the time, it was assumed that any image uploaded was being licensed under the GFDL (as all text contributions are) unless otherwise noted. Subsequently, sometime in late 2005 I believe, there needed to be an expressed free license rather then the other way around. Given all the images that did not have great, or any, licenses that were in use, the GFDL-presumed tag was created. And now that the original user is no longer active here, it is not possible to confirm his intention with the image.

These tagged images are not at risk of deletion solely for the fact of the presumed licnese, so no worries about the image disapearing at this point. The issue with using a presumed licnesed image, is an article with such an image may not be picked up for inclusion in any future stable release of WP articles or at minimum, would not include the image.

So, if nothing is done, there will be little, if any, repercussions; a replacement would make the encyclopedia that much more free. I hope I answered your questions and concerns, but please if not, just drop me another note on my talk page. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


 * If your son is fine with the having the image licnesed under the GFDL licnese (as all his text already is) then have him log in and replace the GFDL-presumed tag with GFDL-self on the image page itself. If you are getting him to do that, have him do it for both images that he has uploaded, Image:StAndrews-Rome1.jpg and Image:StAndrews-Rome2.jpg.  I understand your comments about people freaking out about the licenings.  Copyright in the first place is a confusing thing, and WP has very tight limitations on top of that because of its mission -- to create a free encyclopedic that anyone can use.  Many people here don't understand some of the ramifications.  Under some licensing, I could take the person's photos and make money off them, create a whole coffee table book and not have to pay anyone any fees.  People are releasing their creative rights for my potential profit.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 13:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Dark Ages
Could you weigh in (again) at Dark Ages? I've constructed a lead paragraph that I hoped would clarify the scope of the article and satisfy everyone, but it has met with some resistance.--Cúchullain t/ c 19:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)