User talk:MECU/Archive/2007/June

Bot done
I just edited the bot request page a few minutes after you did... if you can go ahead and check it, and tell me the details (how often and where results go), we should be set. -- Auto ( talk / contribs ) 17:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Yuki-NGBC.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Yuki-NGBC.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I give up!
As I noted on my talk page to ShakespeareFan00, I am not going to waste my time fighting and justifying every period and semicolon five ways to Sunday with the bureaucrats who come down on those of us who are trying to make Wikipedia better. When I added those images, which, by the way, are from a United States government source, I met all of the standards of that time. If you and the other rules lawyers want to continue cracking down with the ever expanding set of restrictions, by all means do so.

Please delete media of mine that I have added and be sure to enjoy your text-only encyclopedia.

Epolk 17:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Riya Calendar.jpg
Please, let me know if the use and info, as well as the article inclusions are alright or not. I am confidant that the rationale and the use can be enhanced anough to keep its use fair. If you think let me know that, too. Respond to my talk page. Thanks for your attention. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 16:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, dear, there seems to be a misunderstanding here. I was looking for an advise, not a debate, and requested to have it on my talk page. If the image is really invalid as fair, I'd like to remove it by use of a db-self tag. Anyways, thanks for your attention. Aditya Kabir 19:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your answer. I posted a request on your talk page because of your membership of WikiProject Image Monitoring Group. I posted to all members of the group. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 18:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

RFA
When I asked you a few months back, you said that you would reconsider in June. Summer is upon us and the dog days of the month before the month before the month before football season are here. Would you be willing to accept an adminship nomination at this time? --BigDT 00:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ohhhhhh, this would certainly get my strong support!  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  00:25, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe we can keep Mecu busy on commons for a week and make him an admin here before he knows it. ;) --BigDT 00:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * He he, forge some answers for him!  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  00:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Conspiracy! Requests for adminship/Mecu 2 .  --BigDT 01:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh ... and yeah ... that annoying template:

 BigDT (and hopefuly a few other co-conspirators) would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact BigDT to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/Mecu 2. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
 * I would have no problems re-co-nomming you, if it's acceptable for the same user to nom someone twice. However, can I make sure that all opposition from the last RfA has been answered and you would be okay with a co-nom before I do so?-- Wizardman 01:33, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad the timing worked out. ;) As always, please make sure that you carefully read the Requests for adminship/nominate.  --BigDT 17:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * After some questioning of myself, I added in my co-nom. I was a little reluctant due to having a rather poor nom streak as of late, but I expect that you'll reverse that, you'd be great as an admin. Good luck.-- Wizardman 21:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm only supporting so that you can help out with CAT:FURD, by the way :p Riana â  13:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Michelle Bachelet
Hi,

About the Michelle Bachelet article:

I'm new to Wikipedia, and obviously didn't take enough care in assuring I was editing according to certain rules. I made two changes to the Bachelet article; I removed a line saying "Augusto Pinochet o mejor conocido como el salvador de chile" which according to the vandalism article is in fact..well, vandalism. Sneaky vandalism, apparently. Secondly I removed a line saying "She's famous for her "travels" every time chile is on crisis." True, I shouldn't have removed it, I apologize, I was going for one of those -citation needed- or an equivalent to "what relevance does it have?/link to something, please". Obvously you are the more experienced contributer so reverting this line is perfectly understandable. But as for the first sentence I removed, I still feel it's inappropriate and vandalism, so if maybe you could point out how it could be discussed changing or removing it it'd be appreciated.

In any case thank you for your message and the links provided. They were very helpful and being a newbie I should have read them through thoroughly in the first place, Thanks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sugarxbones

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Bachelet

1st edit:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michelle_Bachelet&diff=prev&oldid=136939211

2nd edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michelle_Bachelet&diff=prev&oldid=136940759

Sugarxbones 10:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello again -

No worries :) Thanks for the tips and links

--Sugarxbones 20:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

your marking of images for deletion
you wanted source information for US government property image that is exempt from copyright restriction under the US law and for the purposes of wikipedia. Your action is at the following link. The image has the proper copyright explanation attributes. What is the rationale of your actions against the image, with your legitimate reference and explanation as to how this changes the acceptability of the image with the already existing copyright exemption declaration. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Gursel_and_Norstad.jpg&action=history 71.126.57.161 17:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The image still needs to have a source. Where did it come from? A government website?  A government brochure? --BigDT 17:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Eagle
I see you are an Eagle Scout. You may want to join WikiProject_Scouting.Rlevse 02:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mecu - I am taking another shot at uploading a picture for the Motorola CTO Padmasree Warrior and have posted a discussion on the image page as to why I think it can now be used because it is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License. Please see the page. I am also consulting with user Abu badali on this subject, and have alerted him to this new discussion as well. I would really like to get to a consensus between the two of you as to if this is sufficient for me to upload the image. Here is the external link to the image where you can see the license at the bottom of the page. I would like to upload the first image.  Mediathink 21:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)MediaThink

Thank you for your reply. I have another question then - what is the criteria for a free image? What is an acceptable license, because isn't that license specifically for the use on Wikipedia? Mediathink 18:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)MediaThink

MECU, thank you so much for your response, that really made it clear to me. I will definitely check the issue on the Village Pump and will also check with the webpage source. Thanks again. Mediathink 19:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I did click the + sign, and as you can see, it just added it to the bottom of your page. I missed the Subject headline bar though, and that is why there is no new Heading for my posts. Thanks! Mediathink 20:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Canon logo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Canon logo.png. 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. King of Hearts 23:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CLE 5278.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:CLE 5278.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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. Ilse@ 09:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ClevelandCavaliersOld2.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ClevelandCavaliersOld2.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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. Ilse@ 09:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ClevelandCavaliersOld1.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ClevelandCavaliersOld1.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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. Ilse@ 09:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ClevelandCavaliersalternatelogo.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ClevelandCavaliersalternatelogo.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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. Ilse@ 09:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Help Needed from Adoptee
Mecu - thank you for adopting me awhile back. I am now active again on WP and have a question for you. I have been working within my area writing a new article and it is coming along. But, as I have been surfing through the various areas my article is within, I have found some things that either A. Do not belong in a given category, (EXAMPLE:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonesetting) - this should not be under "Jewellers" but instead under either Jewellery or something related to the act of making jewelry, -- or B. something that should be deleted, (EXAMPLE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_&_Ice_(Retail))

So - my question is - what are the guidelines for someone like me who is not an admin in terms of notifying the appropriate parties for either redirect or speedy deletion?

Thanks so much again, archiemartinArchiemartin

Image:Ruslana_pub.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ruslana_pub.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image 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 the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Videmus Omnia 22:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

RFA
With your RFA closing soon, I would like to wish in your final hours of this grueling process. Being nominated for Adminship is a tough thing, but are certinaly ready. Let me just be the first to say this possibly pre-mature thing: CONGRATS ON ALMOST BEING AN ADMINISTRATOR.

Good Luck,

Politics rule 17:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

OTRS and Commons
I have uploaded 5 images dealing with Brownsea Island, England to wikipedia and to commons. I have a GFDL release for them and have sent it to permissions. I put ncd on the wiki uploads and otrs_pending to the commons uploads. I thought I'd let you know as you are active in both areas. The images are: Brownsea Cottages.png, Brownsea Castel.png, St. Mary's.png, Brownsea Wood.png, and The Scout post at the camp on Brownsea.png. Let me know if you have questions. Rlevse 17:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Closed
Your RFA closed, and it now looks like your an admin! Congrats!

Politics rule 00:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess I can say congratulations any minute now
Here you go ... have a mop. --BigDT 00:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Congrats!  Daniel  01:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Adminship
Congratulations, you are now an administrator! If you haven't already, now is the time look through the Administrators' how-to guide and Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Administrators' noticeboard. Warofdreams talk 01:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Even though I (strong) opposed you, I wish you good luck with your new tools :)  Majorly  (talk) 01:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

To all users who participated in my RFA:  thank you . The kind words are appreciated. The constructive criticism I will use to become better. I hope I live up to the expectations. MECU ≈ talk 14:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Congrats, and good luck with your new tools!   — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 21:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Congratulations Mecu - I've got no doubts that you will make a fine administrator.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  23:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Congrats Mecu - and I know you're doing well already... thanks for reducing the backlog at the fair-use reduced cat :) Riana ⁂  23:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bobby_Anderson_football.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bobby_Anderson_football.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Rashaan_Salaam.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Rashaan_Salaam.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 15:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Byron_White_football.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Byron_White_football.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 15:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Mecu
Mecu - thanks for the info about WP ettiquette and how to handle things I find as I go along within my given medium. You are a big help. Grateful you adopted me. PS. I think I may have inadvertently deleted something from your talk page. I am sorry...this is why I needed to be adopted. I restored it. Sorry. ArchiemartinArchiemartin 16:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Linkandmida.jpg
I have tagged Image:Linkandmida.jpg as orphaned fairuse. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add article name to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thesearemyfriends.jpg
Meh, fine. It's still speedyable anyway (but only in seven days time). Will (talk) 15:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Please restore Image:Uriparty logo.jpg
Please restore Image:Uriparty logo.jpg and change the copyright tag to Non-free logo so that it can be used in Uri Party. Thank you. --Eastmain 21:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I have added the logo to Uri Party and added a fair use rationale to the description page. --Eastmain 21:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a moment to review a decision?
Please see and the request for protection. I made a decision to s-protect the article (in which I am admittedly a party to a BLP dispute) on an emergency basis based on and other subsequent statements by that IP user. Could you review the protection (without being prejudiced by my prior decision - in other words, feel free to remove it with my blessing) and either overturn it or confirm it (and add an appropriate template - or  ) to the discussion and a related unprotection request? Thanks. --BigDT 23:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks ... I appreciate you looking at it. --BigDT 00:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It's better to keep this page protected. You made the right call. BigDT is clearly biased and has been using wikipedia to promote his candidate. All attempts to arrive at a compromise were ignored and he abused his powers as a sysop to prevent myself and others from adding new information. There was no threat of vandalism on my part. I merely stated that there was a discussion about the abuses committed here at another forum. I would recommend protecting Political positions of Fred Thompson as well because the same problems are taking place over there.--74.220.207.95 00:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, my candidate is Jim Gilmore. I actually worked on his campaign when he was running for governor.  Thanks for playing, though. --BigDT 00:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:PS2-Logo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:PS2-Logo.png. 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Recess.png
I have tagged Image:Recess.png as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 16:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

On the images in Darya Dadvar
Dear MECU, thank you for your messages. The three images in the article on Ms Darya Dadvar are courtesy of Ms Dadvar herself. Just before placing her first (and only) photograph in this article, I wrote to her, asking her whether she agreed that her photgraph be placed on Wikipedia (you deleted this photograph and later another colleague of yours did the same at the very moment when I was composing the appropriate copy-right statement --- I alway wonder about the haste with which photographs are removed, independent of who may have placed these photogrphas; as a long-standing contributor to Wikipedia, I hope and expect that moderators will take into account that if something is not in perfect order, it may not be my fault: when I write to someone, my further actions remain dependent on the speed with which people respond to my requests; to be frank with you, having to upload one and the same photograph for three times, felt insulting to my dignity; I am an academic and not a photograph uploader --- these are moments that I seriously consider to give up and leave Wikipedia to those who are endowed with more patience than I am). Yesterday evening Ms Dadvar responded to my e-mail (of Sunday), providing me with the high-resolution pictures that now are presented in Darya Dadvar. As I understand it, she explicitly agrees with the placing of her three photographs in Darya Dadvar. I have now written to her and asked her to inspect the copy-right statements that I have attached to her photographs and see whether they conform with her explicit wish. Should this turn out not to be the case, she herself will replace the present copy-right statements with those which she considers as more appropriate. Consequently, from now onwards (more precisely, from yesterday evening) I am no longer responsible for the photographs of Ms Dadvar: she is fully in charge, as I have presented her with all the required details. With kind regards, --BF 16:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear MECU, further to my above note, I just noticed that you have attached some messages to the photographs. If you read the copy-right statements, then you will notice that these copy-right statements explicitly name Ms Dadvar as the copy-right holder (her name is explicitly mentioned in the texts of the pertinent copy-right statements). May I therefore request you to be kind enough and remove your additions to these photographs? I have spent more time on these photographs than is good for me or my health --- I have just reached the limit of what I can reasonably tolerate. Regrads, --BF 17:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear MECU, thank you for your message. I just read the information on Wikipedia to which you had referred. I am afraid that they do not address the present problem; above all, I do not wish to run errands for Wikipedia. The way to resolve the problem is that Wikipedia writes directly to Ms Dadvar herself and enquires about the validity of my claim --- I find it shocking, absolutely shocking and insulting that you do not take my word, given the fact that my user-name is my actual name and the photograph files clearly display my name as the person responsible for their downloading --- may I suggest that Wikipedia consider to review her working practices, becasue continuing your present ways will secure that those who value their dignity leave Wikipedia. As a matter of fact I have the communications between me and Ms Dadvar, however since I do not know whether Ms Dadvar agrees to their disclosure, I decline to disclose them at this stage to any third party. The e-mail address of Ms Dadvar is as follows (this is a matter of public knowledge, as it can be found in the official website of Ms Dadvar): "email@darya-dadvar.com". Ms Dadvar should be able to confirm my statements. For your information, I do not wish to be burdened with matters related to these photographs any longer, so please kindly exclude me from any further communications regarding these photographs (you may already have seen the Nota bene at the top of my page). Finally, should these three photograpgs be deleted, I will discontinue all my activites on Wikipedia; it will be the last straw, convincing me that I should not be wasting my time here any longer. Wish you and Wikipedia luck. --BF 21:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Rebecca dru
Hello. How's that mop working out for you? :-)

You recently undeleted Rebecca dru after the initial copyright concerns where taken care of through OTRS. But nevertheless, the content is completely inappropriate because spam released under the GFDL is still spam. I'll remove the speedy tag for now but can you take a look and either clean it up or re-delete the page with a few words of explanation to the creator? Thanks (and forgive me for dumping the problem on you!) Pascal.Tesson 22:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok. I've nuked it. Pascal.Tesson 02:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Dimetrodon_BW.jpg and Image:Chasmatosaurus_BW.jpg
Hi Mecu, You've speedily deleted these two images that were wrongfully tagged as db-noimage by somebody who sent the speedy deletion notice to the wrong author. Not sure what happened as these images exist on Commons. Now, these images appear on the English wiki but with the image tab reddened. Could you correct this? Thanks in advance for your help. ArthurWeasley 00:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * OK. I think I understand now. I guess I was somewhat startled to indirectly receive (as the notice was sent to somebody else) speedy deletion notices on two of the hundred images I've uploaded on Commons. Thanks for having clarified the situation. ArthurWeasley 05:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:Takashi_Murakami_c.jpg (from Commons)
So I have relocated the Flickr image that was moved. It is still on Flickr and still has a CC/SA license. Can you restore it now? I can do the relinking, but I'd rather not do all the cut-paste-upload again. Thanks! --Knulclunk 02:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)


 * You deleted the original images, yes? They were deleted because there was no trail back to the creative commons release on Flickr, yes? I have relocated the image Flickr, and it still has the CC license, yes? Then there is no reason for the images to remain deleted then, right? --Knulclunk 03:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Urg. I'm looking right at it. You can't see it when you're logged onto Flickr? I swear it is marked CC-A and public. --Knulclunk 06:42, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Excellent! Thank you. --Knulclunk 14:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ruslana_pub.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Ruslana_pub.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 03:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Fred Thompson
This article appears to be going on 3 days of full protection. Is this still necessary? If there's an ongoing problem with specific individuals, would you consider blocking them individually? MoodyGroove 18:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove
 * I didn't realize it was that bad. Thanks for the reply. MoodyGroove 20:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove

Fred Thompson and POV Pushing
I understand that you protected the Fred Thompson article as a way to get the opposing sides to reach a consensus through reasoned discussion and compromise but that is not what is taking place. Not even one full day after the article was protected, one of the admins (BigDT) involved in the discussions managed to get another admin (Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh) to make the changes we couldn't reach an agreement upon. The little discussion we had before has turned into non existent discussion and now he is editing the article as he sees fit without any form of consultation. This particular admin is clearly a supporter of Fred Thompson in the presidential election and he is using wikipedia as a platform to promote him. There is no room for the inclusion of any piece of information that might not paint him in a positive light. The article is not neutral. POV pushing is more then evident. I don't know what's the best course of action to take under the circumstances but I think the article should at least have the latest changes reversed to respect the protection you put into effect. --JGoldwater 16:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have made zero edits since the article was protected. The fixes made by the other admin were all unrelated to the dispute - a spelling correction, removing spam, delinking an article that didn't exist at the time, and adding a link to the commons page.  You are not welcome to use that article for spamming links to non-notable blogs.  That has nothing to do with POV or with LifeLock.  If and when the blog becomes notable (meaning, it has media recognition or official recognition), then it is appropriate to consider adding it.  As of now, it is linkspam and will be treated accordingly. There is a proposal that seems to have early acceptance that the article can simply have one sentence about LifeLock which will link to the newly created LifeLock article.  This is a compromise between your version and those of us who do not believe that it is notable to mention one of probably hundreds of advertisements that Thompson has done as a part of his media contracts. --BigDT 18:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Goodwinlost.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Goodwinlost.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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. Videmus Omnia 21:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lost_S02E22_CreepyLady.jpg
I have tagged Image:Lost_S02E22_CreepyLady.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 22:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Parminder_Rasgotra.jpg
I have tagged Image:Parminder_Rasgotra.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 02:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Crowning moments
Greetings. I'm contacting you because you have experience in dealing with our non-free content policy as it pertains to images. A so-far unresolved issue deals with "crowning moments" for beauty pageant contestants. This specific issue is heated because of previous disputes between the aptly named User:PageantUpdater and the obscurely named User:Abu badali, but the same issue could apply to many other classes of images as well. All parties have made their cases adequately, but consensus is still elusive, so the issue remains open long after other problems have been resolved. Could you go to and give your opinion? It would really help us to finish this issue and move on. Thanks! – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC) (This message was copied to several other image-wonks at the same time.)