User talk:Eeekster/Archives/2013/April

Aaron Robinson (composer)
Hi. I noticed that you recently placed a disclaimer regarding "Bare URLs" as citations on this article: Aaron Robinson. Could you please explain which citations are Bare URLS? It helps those of us to see on the Talk Page the "why" and "how" rather than just a blanket statement. Thanks!

Music4ibc (talk) 17:56, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The entire External links section (minus the IMDB link) is all bare URLs. Why did you have to ask? Eeekster (talk) 19:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The disclaimer "This article uses bare URLs for citations" placed at the beginning of the article refers to "In-Article Line Citations" which are not line references for external links. The references cited do not have bare URLs. The first definition for a Bare URL is: A bare URL is a URL cited as a reference. External links are separate. It would have been more helpful and less misleading for first time users and contributors to have placed a disclaimer at the beginning of the External Link section than to blanket the entire article. External Links are not required to be treated in the same manner as inline citations within an article since "they should not normally be used in the body of an article." Although it would be helpful in the event of link rot, it is not required. Perhaps it would be beneficial to this article to place it above / within the appropriate section, rather than inviting inexperience contributors the idea that something is wrong within the article's citation references URLs. I'm sure a contributor would be more than happy to go in and alleviate the bare URLs in the "External Link" section.

Music4ibc (talk) 17:49, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * External links are sources as well and bare URLs in that section need to be fixed. I see no problem with the tag. Eeekster (talk) 19:29, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Anthony Shorris
Please review added citations and note Under Construction tags. The completely empty Biography section should have served as a hint that the page was nowhere near finished and not, in fact, some nefarious, citation-less spam article. I should have the (cited) biography complete within a couple hours. --User:Milkshake97 (talk) 20:01, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Veronicacarly


A tag has been placed on User talk:Veronicacarly, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Eeekster (talk) 01:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

DUDE!
I made a correction that was fixing an INCORRECT fact. Please put it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techinicalrestrictions1 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

OTRS
Re:, there is this great concept on Wikipedia called OTRS, whereby an email is sent to OTRS with the permissions for a photo (like, from the photographer and the subject, if you can get them). And, you know, they're pretty busy, and take a few days to get to your email. It would be super grand if you could bone up on this particular subject matter, and not try to delete files within a few hours of posting when an OTRS tag is posted :) Jeremy112233 (talk) 01:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The EXIF data claims the copyright belongs to the New York Times. That's why I tagged it now and why I don't believe you'll be able to clear it via OTRS. Eeekster (talk) 02:21, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Riddle
Re:, I added Riddle to Notable Cosplayers because she is just that. Cosplay for a Cause raised 30K for Japan tsunami relief which she created, She have been in cosplay for 12plus yrs. AS well as international guest, been in a PBS documentary as a noted cosplayer. A reference model for comic book artist she passes any litmus test for notable cosplayer. — Preceding nemoghost comment added by Nemoghost (talk • contribs) 00:04, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You need to explain and source your edit. Eeekster (talk) 01:01, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Uploading an image on WIkipedia.
Hi, you have been constantly notifying me about the images I upload. I would like to know as to how else do I upload an image to the world about a particular person. I know that wikipedia takes this very seriously. But this not done with an intention to violate your rules.

Now, if I see an image on Google, and I write the Author as mentioned on google images, what is wrong in that?

Please do let me know how can I upload images on wikipedia, which are not my work and have been taken from google images only.

Here is my e-mail id- nipuinnayar@hotmail.com

Thanking You, Nipun Nayar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nipunnayar (talk • contribs) 17:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Please ask the good folks at Media copyright questions. But first read the notices you have been give. Eeekster (talk) 19:12, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

[[File:Thatcher Death Celebration, Glasgow.jpg]]
You recently marked for a speedy deletion with a rational "F9: Media file copyright violation without fair use or credible claim of permission." What is your reason to believe the file is a copyright violation? Did the file description specify a "media source"?

I found a thumbnail version of the file still on the Wikimedia server. Using Google image search I am unable to find any source for the image. If the image had been published in some commercial media, I would expect Google to find it.

The uploader of the image says he is a "journalist living in Scotland", so I have no reason to believe he could not have taken the photo himself. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You provided a source and I checked it. The license at the source was not the license you claim and it was not compatible with Wikipedia. Eeekster (talk) 01:45, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * No, I did not upload the image. Could you please provide a link to the source. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 02:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If you didn't upload the image, who did? Eeekster (talk) 03:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * User:Zcbeaton did. You left a note on his talk page. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 03:38, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Then why are you talking to me about it? Eeekster (talk) 04:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Because you are the one who claimed the image is a copyvio. I suppose you have some proof for your claim – like a link to the original. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 05:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't just make a claim; it was a copyright violation and the tag included the link. Why are you jumping all over me about a clear violation that has already been dealt with? Eeekster (talk) 06:03, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Copyright
Hi I was wondering if you could help me with sorting out the copyright issues on my photos? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maltaboy101 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The issues are that you keep removing tags after making false claims. And you need to stop grabbing images from the web and claiming them as your own work. Eeekster (talk) 19:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I see, they are my family's photos, apart from File:Seraph Operation Mincemeat.jpg, they are all family photos that are on my computer aswell as on the internet on that site, it was my family who put them on http://www.maritimequest.com/misc_pages/david_scott_collection/radm_sir_david_scott_collection_page_1.htm and i have just scanned in File:Scott 1942.jpg from my private collection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maltaboy101 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

i was under the impression that it was lawful, as long as one owns the photographs to state they are yours — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maltaboy101 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Your impression is wrong since the photos have already been published elsewhere. Even more wrong is removing the deletion tags and you've been warned about that many times. Did you actually read those warnings? Eeekster (talk) 20:11, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

ok im very sorry, im kind of new to Wikipedia, how would I then go about making them legal for my page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maltaboy101 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Carter (Real estate)
You recently added two tags to the Carter Real Estate page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter_%28real_estate%29

I have edited the piece so I believe it should have the tags removed. Please take them down. Thanks. Sduncan87 (talk) Savannah
 * The article still reads like an advertisement. Eeekster (talk) 19:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you please explain how so? Also can you please remove the citation tag? Sduncan87 (talk) Savannah —Preceding undated comment added 16:27, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

File:ABRAS Logo.jpg
First of all, sorry because I am new on this of writting articles and uploading figures on wikipedia.

This image was uploaded to the following article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instituto_de_Astronom%C3%ADa_Te%C3%B3rica_y_Experimental

Your comment is that because is an institutional logo is therefore unlikely to be free. I want to remark that the logo was created by me in order to publicize the project in a web page, so the logo is an unofficial one. Arielz77 (talk)
 * You are saying it has already been published on a webpage? Eeekster (talk) 21:32, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Randy Houser.jpg
What do you mean by "flickr washing"? The image was clearly from a Flickr account that had its images marked as Creative Commons Attribution. Likewise the Florida Georgia Line image. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It means uploading a non-free image and putting a free license on it. Eeekster (talk) 21:31, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Did you even check the Flickr links corresponding to them? The Florida Georgia Line clearly had a Creative Commons 2.0 tag, which is acceptable. I know, because I'm the one who uploaded it. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Pa050242.jpg
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia: You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
 * File:Pa050242.jpg

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 21:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Freindly question
This is truly a friendly question. You added a "Cleanup" tag to File:Gilbert-American_Legion_Post_39-1950.jpg. What exactly do you mean by stating that the image needs cleanup? Tony the Marine (talk) 01:33, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Did you read what I said in the tag? Eeekster (talk) 01:51, 23 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I see now "Reason: needs to be rotated a bit to comply with local gravity", I don't know how I missed that. I must be getting old. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:55, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Carter (Real Estate)
I believe we have corrected the links so they are not bare URL's and are proper citations. Can you please remove those tags? Also, I'm not sure what part of the article you think is too "advertising" so can you please explain for that one so we can fix? Thanks! Sduncan87 (talk)
 * If you've corrected the linkrot, remove that tag. As for advertising try reading the article. Eeekster (talk) 20:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Flagged files
Dear Eeekster,

Thank you for bringing the files I uploaded to my attention. I have decided that I will email the owner asking for permission for all the files used and publish under 'free use.' This is the file in question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Photoshoot_of_Bespoke_Henna_products.jpg

Is it sufficient that I send them an email of the sample format and get them to respond confirming these images are available under free use? I am very confused about the particular rulings on free and non free images so I would really appreciate more clarity. The reason for wanting to add these images is because they conceptulise the artwork of the page I created and thus I feel would really add value to the page.

en.wikepdia.org/wiki/bespokehenna

ADZQ90 (talk) 01:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Adeel

Possibly_unfree_files/2013_April_27
One determined copyright violator! After unsquashing image found instant match at http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/congress-forces-rashid-alvi-to-eat-his-words-against-mulayam-singh-yadav/1/201741.html. Now blocked.  Ron h jones  (Talk) 17:58, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I was waiting for just one more image upload before reporting him but knew a block was coming his way. Eeekster (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes - the old "give them enough rope" philosophy, always works in the end. ;-)  Ron h jones  (Talk) 20:20, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Cayucas relisted
Hi - since you were active in a previous AfD discussion, I thought you might want to know that Cayucas has been relisted, since there are now additional references that arguably establish notability. Floatjon (talk) 20:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)