User talk:Jrfoldes/Archives/2010/June

June 2010
Your behaviour is becoming disruptive. Please leave the subject of You Can't Do that... alone for a while, at least a month would be my recommendation. Disruptive obsessive users tend to have a short and turbulent life on Wikipedia. Guy (Help!) 15:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Caretaker 2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Greb (talk) 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC) Thank you for uploading File:JackShriker.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Greb (talk) 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This should be fixed. Please review.Jrfoldes (talk) 15:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Caretaker 1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Greb (talk) 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This should be fixed. Please review. Jrfoldes (talk) 15:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Centurious1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Greb (talk) 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This should be fixed. Please review. Jrfoldes (talk) 15:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Zadkiel Head.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Greb (talk) 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This should be fixed please review. Jrfoldes (talk) 15:50, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Deacon new.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Greb (talk) 00:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This should be fixed. Please review. Jrfoldes (talk) 15:50, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Just a heads up on some things: And a last item - being a "huge fan" is a good thing in some ways, but it can be a draw back in others. Generally it means you want to see the information done right. You just have to check yourself at times since you do not get to add your interpretation, conclusions, or opinions into the articles. - J Greb (talk) 03:40, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Navigational boxes
 * Within the Comics project an effort is made to not include everything that ever lightly touched a topic in the 'box. That means it gets pared down to the central topic, characters, and arcs/publications. With things like Midnight Sons that means the characters are limited to those that are explicitly members. Characters a reader or "huge fan" assumes are members because they worked with the team do not get added. Foes are limited to those created for the topic or that have become intrinsically linked to it. Lillith and Blackout fit - the various MU "Devil" stand ins don't. Nor does a Hulk villain. Nor any villain that exists apart from the Sons.
 * Color combinations should be set up respecting accessibility guide lines. If an editor sees a problem with a color combination, it gets pulled.
 * Categories
 * Long standing consensus is that categories are not for collecting team members, supporting characters, foes, or similar articles. Publications, teams, locations, objects, and titular characters (that would be Blaze and Keitch in Category:Ghost Rider but not in Category:Midnight Sons) are fair game.
 * Generally they run from general to specific, so Ghost Rider would go under Midnight Sons, not the other way round.
 * Images - Just fair waring but images that look like they are Photoshopped collages (The Deacon) are likely to be put up for deletion.
 * Articles - Including a character as a "team member", especially a 3rd tier team like the Midnight Sons is going to be questioned based on on off stories. And it tends to hinge on "Was the team working with other characters?", "Do those outside the team assume/assign additional characters to the team?", and "Does the team accept the other characters as actual team members?"


 * Hi J Greb I do appreciate the time you took to get back to me. I'm still learning about photos, so it is all trial and error at this point. As for Navbox colours yes I understand completely. As for the deletion of various characters from the Midnight Sons navbox while I understand your p.o.v. some were indeed valid entries. Let's not forget the team expanded in Marvel Zombie 4, and added new enemies to the mix. Equally Midnight Sons Unlimited delved deep into the realm of the Midnight Sons and their villains and made it quite clear who belongs where. Yes I understand that a guest appearance by Spider-man (Midnight Sons Unlimited #3) does not a Midnight Sons make, but villains like Varnae who have repeatedly come out of the woodwork should qualify. Many of these characters/villains have had huge roles in storylines, yes even the Scarlet Witch.


 * So I made some changes to the Midnight Sons navbox. Everyone who is there has been a key player on the team and made huge contributions to storylines. Yes The Hood played a huge role in Marvel Zombies 4 as did Dormammu when he posessed Jennifer Kale. All heroes and villains are there and are members to the circle. As for the colour, sorry I'm at a complete loss if you want to change it to normal be my guess, if you know of anything cool that could fit a horror theme I would love that.


 * Part of the problem is that Marvel "shares" characters across many topic sets. Most have only one topic, if that, though that they are associated with in the minds of people other that the dedicated fans. There are a very few, like the Kingpin, that are associated with more than one topic set. Looking at what you want to add to navbox does become an excercise in checking your instinct as a fan - does it belong there in general terms it is associated with the topic or doe it belong there because the fan says it should be there?
 * Another part that is germaine to MS is that just because a character is part of a topic set of an MS member doesn't make it part of the MS topic set. The Orb is a Ghost Rider related character but not a Midnoight Sons related one. The same with Dracula and the vampires.
 * And when you start looking at characters like Scarlet Witch, Doctor Strange, Man-Thing, and so on, it does become an issue of are you adding the character because they were "borrowed" from another topic set to be used in a story along with the MS or were they being incorperated into it. Again, that become a tricky thing - is it based on a fan's assumption or has, say, the Scarlet Witch jumped from being seen generally as part of the "X-Men" topic to being part of the Midnight Sons?
 * - J Greb (talk) 04:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * And in response to the edit conflict part...
 * There would be a good argument, mildly, to include the key players in Marvel Zombies 4 in a 'box focused on that, not the other way round.
 * - J Greb (talk) 04:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Plus there is already an article for.
 * Some of the characters that were given the Midnight Sons navbox and category didn't even mention the Midnight Sons in the article, this is a pretty fundamental failure on inclusion criteria (before we even get to discussing how large a connection they have with the group and how important their role is with them). (Emperor (talk) 13:50, 10 June 2010 (UTC))
 * Okay why don't we do this then as opposed to battling back and forth and editing. I'll post the characters I've listed in the box along with my rational for their inclusion and we can discuss it from there.


 * Ghost Rider (Danny Ketch) -- Founding member of the current team. Danny Ketch was attached to Noble Kale entity
 * Johnny Blaze -- Founding member of the current team
 * Noble Kale --Founding member of the current team, hinted at being member of past incarnations
 * Vengeance (Lt. Michael Badilino) -- Member joins in Siege of Darkness
 * Darkhold Redeemers
 * Modred --Member joins in Midnight Massacre
 * Victoria Montesi -- Founding member of current team
 * Sam Buchannon -- Not added into Wiki yet, but founding member of the team
 * Professor Louise Hastings -- Not added into Wiki yet, but founding member of the team
 * Jinx -- Not added into Wiki yet, but joins in Midnight Sons Unlimited
 * Nightstalkers
 * Blade -- Founding member of current team
 * Frank Drake -- Founding member of current team
 * Hannibal King -- Founding member of current team
 * Other Members
 * Caretaker -- Founding member of current team, hinted at being member of past incarnations
 * Daimon Hellstorm -- Joins team in Marvel Zombies 4
 * Dr. Strange -- Responsible for creation of current incarnation of the team. Officially joins in Siege of Darkness
 * Jennifer Kale -- Joins team in Midnight Sons Unlimited, viewed as full member in Marvel Zombies 4
 * Man-Thing -- Joins team in Midnight Sons Unlimited, viewed as full member in Marvel Zombies 4
 * Morbius -- Founding member of the team and current team leader.
 * Strange -- Joins team in Siege of Darkness
 * Werewolf By Night -- Joins team in Midnight Massacre
 * Unofficial Members
 * Brother Voodoo -- Assisted team on numerous occasions, and being member of team comes with being Sorcerer Supreme
 * Blazing Skull -- Was the focus of an entire issue of Midnight Sons Unlimited, hinted at being member in past incarnations
 * Scarlet Witch -- Has assisted the team on numerous occasions but never became member
 * Sister Sara -- Like her grandfather she is a Caretaker and it is among her primary duties to advise the team
 * Shriker (Jack D'Auria) -- Caretaker had him join the team, mostly to keep an eye on Dan Ketch.  I have no problem moving him to allies.
 * Villains
 * Blackheart -- Villain who has been working off the scenes
 * Blackout -- Grandson of Lilith and member of her army
 * Black Talon (Samuel Barone) -- Primary villain in Marvel Zombies 4
 * Centurious -- Responsible for the events leading up to and including the Siege of Darkness. Hinted he may have belonged to the team in a past incarnation.
 * Chthon -- There wouldn't be any stoylines such as the Midnight Massacre if it were not for him. Equally was discovered he was trying to be reborn through VIctoria Montessi during the Siege of Darkness
 * Deadpool (Zombie) -- Primary villain in Marvel Zombies 4
 * Dormammu -- Villain who frequently harass team. Has sworn revenge.
 * Dracula -- Recurring villain
 * The Hood -- Villain from Marvel Zombies 4. Has declared revenge against the team.
 * Lilith -- Main villainess in Rise of the Midnight Sons
 * Mephisto -- Responsible for many of the problems the team encounters
 * Simon Garth --Main villain during Marvel Zombies 4
 * Varnae -- Has repeatedly made attempts against the team. Swore revenge.
 * Zarathos -- Main villain of Siege of Darkness stroyline
 * Allies
 * Stacy Dolan -- No wiki entry yet, but acts as human liaison to the team, Prominent role in Siege of Darkness
 * A.R.M.O.U.R. -- Government agency who currently oversees team
 * Something to get straight right off the bat: Marvel used "The Midnight Sons" as a semi-imprint in the 90s as well as a "team". The team appeared in a specific arc while other loosely related titles - the "horror or occult" themed titles. That a character appeared in an imprinted title does not mean that they were a member of the "team".
 * That said, the "team" consisted of the modern Ghost Riders (Blaze and Keitch), Morbius, the Nightstalkers (Blade, Drake, and King), and by direct implication the first Vengance and the Redeemers. Also, the team didn't actually exist prior to "Rising" so character that interated with the primarys before that arc may not be part of or important to the team.
 * Looking at later members you want to include:
 * Marvel Zombies 4 is a poor, very poor, source. Doctor Strange or A.R.M.O.U.R. collected various "horror" characters including the Midnight Sons to deal with the "Zombies". That does not automatically mint member ship cards for Hellstorm, Doctor Strange, Kale, or Man-Thing.
 * "Joins team in Midnight Sons Unlimited" is vague since it falls under the "imprint". It contained storieds that followed the theme of horror characters. So, just appearing in a story in the anthology does not automatically convey membership.
 * The "Unofficial" members is an original research nightmare - it applies a fan distinction to characters that were never brought into the team. Just because a character help the Sons, even multiple times, doesn't convey membership.
 * A few specific characters:
 * Caretaker(s) - A Ghost Rider supporting character. But that does not translate into being part of the team.
 * Strange - Hasn't appeared since 1995
 * Blazing Skull - "hinted at" falls under OR inclusion.
 * The Lillin created to feature in "Rise" and since, Lillith, and maybe Zarathos are fair game. Including general occult bad guys - Chthon, Dormammu, Mephisto - doesn't work any better than including Doctor Doom and navboxes other than the one for the FF. Same problem with including Ghost Rider specific villains - Blackheart and Centurious (and there's an OR issue with the "hinted at" there) - and Blade specific faoes - Dracula and Varnae. And the Marvel Zombies 4 villains... one appearance and/or swearing vengance doesn't cut it here.
 * - J Greb (talk) 17:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm really going to have to disagree with Doctor Strange and Caretaker. They are known individual on the team. Even at the end of Siege of Darkness they were made official members. Actually Caretaker would probably be the official archivist of the team. Equally no matter how you cut it during Marvel Zombies 4 the Midnight Sons were an official team and Hellstorm, Jennifer Kale, Man-Thing, and Werewolf by Night were all members. As for Varnae and Centurious they both had more then one appearance.Jrfoldes (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Who keeps removing Morbius? He is a full fledged member of the team who has been in ever incarnation. I have no trouble arguing the merits of some of the other members, but Morbius can't be removed as there would be no argument. The original Midnight Sons were comprised of the prophesied Circle of Nine to which Morbius was part of the Nine. Jrfoldes (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Morbius's removal has been an error... and fixed now.
 * As for the rest... The bottom line here is you are insisting they go in based on your exert opinion. That's a no-go. If you can point to an in story roster for the Midnight Sone or a reliable secondary source for it, all well and good. If not, they aren't added on whim. - J Greb (talk) 19:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Marvel Zombies 4 made the current roster clear, Morbius, Hellstorm, Jenn Kale, WereWolf By Night and Man-Thing.
 * How? Seriously. By the characters just being in the comic? That isn't enough. Is it Morbius stating "I will gather the Midnight Sons." and showing up with those 4? One of the characters running down a "checklist" in the story? Something else that doesn't need a leap of faith by the reader? - J Greb (talk) 21:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah pretty much. I believe Morbius did that at the end of Marvel Zombies 3. In Marvel Zombies 4 he states, and I paraphrase, I assembled this team and named them after the old group. Actually each issue of Marvel Zombies 4 opens with a character giving a video will, about why they joined the team. Even the record screen has Midnight Sons written on it. On a different note I added the missing Darkhold Redeemers to the navbox so that for the most part is complete. Now as for the subject of Noble Kale, this is kind of confusing as he is the entity that is the Dan Ketch Ghost Rider, but he's separate altogether. It's really hard to explain and it will take a major advil to explain properly but for the most part it is wise just to leave him in th navbox.Jrfoldes (talk) 23:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok... The Morbius bit is a fair thing to hang the inclusion of Hellstorm, Jenn Kale, Werewolf By Night and Man-Thing on. It's also worth making it clear in the character bios that Morbius recruited them for the team and that they made the video wills as a result of "volunteering".
 * The bit with Noble Kale... I'd say leave it as a Ghost Rider related topic since that seems to be the character's primary reason for existing.
 * And that all still doesn't support the inclusion of Doctor Strange.
 * - J Greb (talk) 00:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually I just looked up under Marvel.com for Midnight Sons, and although it seems to be years since it was updated, Doctor Strange is included in the roster and his alternate form Strange is seen in the main picture. This article was last updated when the mini-series Witches came out and does not include Marvel Zombies 4. Maybe give it the once over and then we can discuss this further. On another note have you been able to review my documentation on the pics?Jrfoldes (talk) 00:46, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikis, even the one hosted at Marvel's own site, are not considered reliable sources. That the Midnight Sons article there is "stale" reinforces that.
 * As for the images... For the ones from comics, did you make the scans or did you lift the images from either the Marvel Database or the wiki at Marvel.com? As for the screencap... it's still esnetually unsources as to where the file came from. The link you provided points to one of Marvel's home pages where the image is not present.
 * - J Greb (talk) 01:20, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If I come across a credible site, comic, or book that reinforces the memberships and villains would you consider that? Sorry I'm not going to let up on Dr. Strange. Actually if his book was part of the Midnight Sons crossover "Siege of Darkness" could that be something to consider?
 * As for the photos I am so confused at this point I'll just wait and see what happens, and maybe try again when I have more info/knowledge.Jrfoldes (talk) 01:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If I come across a credible site, comic, or book that reinforces the memberships and villains would you consider that? Sorry I'm not going to let up on Dr. Strange. Actually if his book was part of the Midnight Sons crossover "Siege of Darkness" could that be something to consider?
 * As for the photos I am so confused at this point I'll just wait and see what happens, and maybe try again when I have more info/knowledge.Jrfoldes (talk) 01:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Caretaker 2.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use 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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 09:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This should be fixed. Please review. Jrfoldes (talk) 15:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Thanks for uploading File:Sdolan.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:46, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Mattprokop.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Bsperry.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Bridgitm.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Joeyp.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:AustinButler.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)