User talk:Lawilson046

Please fill out our brief Teahouse guest survey
Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages sometime in the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 00:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:Bridge Set AA1.pdf
Thanks for uploading File:Bridge Set AA1.pdf. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:06, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Richmond Bridge as it was on completion in 1825.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Richmond Bridge as it was on completion in 1825.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item 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 creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media 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 the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:57, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Richmond Bridge as it was on completion in 1825.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Richmond Bridge as it was on completion in 1825.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Stefan - I did originally have the image linked from the Richmond Bridge (Tasmania) page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmond_Bridge_%28Tasmania%29 ) but its copyright status (Fair Use) was challenged by one of your Wiki colleagues, to which I responded ( see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Richmond_Bridge_as_it_was_on_completion_in_1825.jpg ) and he/she then explained the problem with it; I responded further to that comment on Talk, but did not receive a further reply from he/she. His/her reply appeared to indicate that my initial response argument would not suffice and the file would be deleted sometime after 17th March - the failure to reply to my further statement appeared to confirm that but did leave me in some doubt - further the image page remained there after 17th (still there today, 22-3-15) which left me uncertain of its future status.

Because of that I deleted the link from the Richmond Bridge (Tasmania) page and apparently in so doing prompted your 'Orphaned' statement (I assume this is standard Wiki practice ?. (I have attempted to re-link it but unable to figure out how?)

In a nutshell, my essential argument as to why this image file should be accepted is that, notwithstanding that another person might be able to make a sketch based on the content of my associated research pdf paper (see the link and image of it on the Richmond Bridge page) that would not be readily possibly had I not undertaken that research in the first place as this image (a professionally created oil painting) would not exist, and it is most unlikely to have existed at any time soon, from others.

[I would also point out that the research project was very thoroughly and professionally carried out; it took several hundred hours of my time over a two year period as well as associated research in 'on location' photographic and flora studies by professional assistants]

So, although I cannot secure other than Fair Use approval from the artist, I have successfully secured at least that level of approval. If not presented with Fair Use limitation it will undoubtedly not be presented at all. Nor, if the image is to be deleted, does it appear to be appropriate or relevant to display my pdf research paper since its purpose, culminating in the painted depiction, would be frustrated as far as public display on Wiki is concerned. Well that's unfortunate and just too bad I guess.

You will also see in my second submission to your Wiki colleague my proposal to make a link on the Richmond Bridge page to my own website where the pdf research paper and the subject image is on display, and has been since 2007. Your colleague has so far made no response to that suggestion ?

So to you Stefan, is that not a reasonable and acceptable (to Wiki) alternative ?

Apologies for such a lengthy response

Lawrence A Wilson

File permission problem with File:Bridge Set AA1.pdf
Thanks for uploading File:Bridge Set AA1.pdf, which you've attributed to Joan Humble and others. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 23:16, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you Verno - I spent much time previously trying to satisfy the requirements of Wiki back in March/April without success re both the file to which you refer and separate postings of associated images. Frankly the system is so complicated for what seems to me a simple couple of postings, that it's just not worth the effort; a pity because I believe my file adds real historical interest and relevance about early Tasmania.


 * The subject file (as I have stated previously and as is recorded) was designed and written entirely by me and I own its copyright. The image on its front cover page is from the commissioned painting by Mrs Humble and she has given me permission to use it in the document/file - I have that permission via email from her. I have no problem with the file being fully and openly avaiable to any and all, with normal attribution.


 * That all seems straight forward enough to me.


 * Lawrence Wilson (Lawilson046) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 00:35, 23 June 2015‎ (talk • contribs) Lawilson046
 * Okay, I'll try to walk you through our process, so we can try to ensure that we have all of the copyright i's dotted and t's crossed (I'm afraid it's complicated because it has legal ramifications for Wikipedia, and I'm not entirely sure of what previous communication you may have had with or other editors). The authorization from Mrs. Humble to use her painting needs to be an explicit declaration of its release under a free license--not a generic statement such as permission to use on Wikipedia--and should be sent directly to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Likewise for images created by your son unless he was a minor at the time in which case (I believe) the copyright would reside with you. The drawing by James Gould Medland is old enough to be in the public domain, so we don't need to worry about getting permission for its use. Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns about this. VernoWhitney (talk) 11:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:About Bigge's Bridge - Richmond Tasmania ca 1832.pdf


A tag has been placed on File:About Bigge's Bridge - Richmond Tasmania ca 1832.pdf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip (e.g. a Word document or PDF file) that has no encyclopedic use.

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 "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. Stefan2 (talk) 12:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I agree that you should proceed with deletion of the file - I assume you will do this and it is not requested that I should do it. Lawrence A Wilson lapw (talk) 14:09, 25 October 2015 (UTC)