User talk:MECU/Archive/Archive-May2007

WikProject Template Help
A new WikiProject was recently started. I'm trying to modify its banner to include assessment info. I've taken the as a baseline and I'm in the process of modifying it.

I need help (1) removing the importance ratings (without breaking the template) and (2) enabling bot-assisted assessment. My working sandbox is ( T1) - Any help or advice would be apreciated. Вasil | talk 23:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

PS - I've looked over the help pages but this code is a bit complex.


 * Hoorah! Nice work, sir. Perhaps we should leave the portal stuff in case one gets created. Thanks, again! Вasil  | talk 18:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I've run across some peculiar behaviour and hope you can tell me what I've done wrong. If you go to the Assessement section. When you select the B-Class link in the table, it points to generic Category:B-Class articles rather than Category:B-Class Alabama articles. I've poked about, trying to find the code that generates this, but have been unable to discover its source. Any ideas where I might look? Вasil | talk 16:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Never mind! I manually ran the bot and it took care of the problem. Thanks anyway! Вasil  | talk 17:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Help please
Mecu, I've got a template almost finished, but one of the parser functions on it is messing up. Can you take a look at it and see if you can figure out why the fifth overtime is displaying the way it is? I'm sure it's something simple. The template is at User:Z4ns4tsu/Sandbox4. Thanks in advance. z4ns4tsu \talk 16:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the borders were so I could see the cells when I was changing other features earlier. It's how I noticed that the OT's needed to be made optional. The other stuff is all from whoever made the template. I may change more, but I don't know right now. Thanks for your help on that!  z4ns4tsu \talk  17:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC) cross-posted to here

OK, I've got another challenge for you with that same template. For some reason, whenever it is transcluded it adds two or three (it doesn't seem to be constant) lines of HTML before the table that look like this:

Any idea where that's coming from and how to get rid of it? z4ns4tsu \talk 20:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It doesn't look like that fixed it. The para tags are being set right before the table that the template creates. I know it's not related to the page because it shows up on my test page too. z4ns4tsu \talk  21:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Your Opinion Please
Hello, I was wondering if I could get an outside opinion on a mediation I am involvced in. I don't want you to publically take sides, but if you could look at this section, go down to the heading Proposed Changes near the bottom, and offer me private feedback I would appreciate it. —The preceding John196920022001 20:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I am aware of the original research rule, but they are trying to interpret a passage in a way other than the actual meaning. I know what that passage meant because I talked to the author. I did cite a research paper, but have not included any original research. That correspondance is verfied by the emails, but that is moot; it is original research. I was hoping that I missed something that would help me to determine whether I should keep or delete my citation John196920022001 00:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Jagertee
If I get a camera and take a photo of the bottle label of a commercially sold product, is the resulting image in any way "freer" than an image advertising the same product? In other words, can I claim to be the author of an image which contains mostly other people's work?

If so, okay.

If not, what's the point of your message?

Best wishes, &lt;KF&gt; 21:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If you say so. But although I'm here in Austria Jagertee is not one of my regular drinks, especially not the sugary, factory-produced kind. Yuk. So if the current image has to go, and that's what it looks like, the Jagertee article will have to wait until someone actually tracks down some such bottle in a supermarket and has a camera ready as well. &lt;KF&gt; 21:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Forgotten Realms pictures
Hello,

All the pictures you mentionned on my page are already tagged as fair use. What is wrong, then? Article name makes no sense to me since such a picture can be used in several pages. David Latapie (✒ | @) — www 10:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jacques_Plante,_Montreal_Canadiens_goalie.jpg
Hi, I just reduced the thing to fairuse dimensions. You might want to contact the original uploader. Cheers, :) MikeReichold 13:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC) OOPS, aka Dlohcierekim.

Fair use on some images I uploaded
I will dispute them, but only because I wasn't sure what to tag them as when I first uploaded them. I found the right tag, which is why I replaced the fair use tag with the copyright one they all (should) have right now. CanbekEsen 19:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

g. patrick maxwell tag
I made a note re. this image which you tagged. Besides the fact that it would seem to be fair use for non-commercial identification,the subject of that entry (who holds the copyright) is in fact aware of it's use with no objection. He's an acquiantance of mine who became aware of the entry after some controversial edits were made by a since-banned user. ModeratorTyrenius was involved with that and could provide some context if needed. thanksDroliver 20:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Copyright questions
Hey, was just looking at the copyright pages and wanted to thank you for answering some of the flood of questions and encouraging people to use free content. Cheers, Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 23:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

CU pictures
No worries, penance complete. :) The pictures look great; I was worried that the weather would be crummy, but it's a perfect Colorado day. K e rowyn Leave a note 03:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 16th, 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 06:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright
I appreciate the information you gave about the images GuyanaRain.jpg and GuyanaBrazil.jpg. To avoid any future problem however, I need you to explain to me exactly what I did wrong in the initial upload. I look at the image pages and both of them are tagged with a tag that says I, as the owner, release them. What would you suggest I do differently so I don't cause a problem in the future. Do I add a tag other than the license drop down box? Also, just to verify, I can reupload the images at full resolution by using the same name, correct? Jody B  11:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:!W5.jpg
Maybe I'm seeing things, but right in the summary and licensing blurbs on that photo, it states it was take by a US Military member, in the course of official duties, and is therefore PD as a government created item.--Vidkun 14:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image copyright
(The exchange below is cross posted from User talk:JodyB)

I do not believe that you are the author or hold the license to these images. Did you take these images yourself? If so, can you upload a higher resolution please? Or, did you get these from a website? MECU ≈ talk 12:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC) Now please allow me to ask you a question. What is you basis for suggesting I am dishonest? Please be specific. 2. Under what condition did you decide not to apply WP:AGF? 3. Why have you chosen not to answer my questions posed of you on your talk page? I have done every thing you have asked and I have attempted to gain a better understanding of how to do this in the future. Please tell me exactly what I can do to prove my ownership? Jody B  17:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Sir, please read the following posts [], [], [], []. That should answer the question. But I will say it again: I made the photograph and I am the owner. They were not taken from any website. I can upload a higher resolution photo if you would answer my question posted on your talk page about 6 hours before you posted this remark. How can I be clearer? I sent the email as instructed.
 * Your apology, on my page is appreciated. New images at full resolution have been uploaded using the same name as the previous ones. Would you remove the unfree template please?  Jody B   19:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mysto-Detective203-33.jpg
I added some additional comments that I hope will justify the inclusion of this image. Please let me know what you think.Konczewski 03:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. So I need need to be including more justification beyond the tags?Konczewski 21:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Humanity
The material you reverted to has been merged into human. Fixer1234 03:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Teletubbies
I saw your comment on my talk page regarding my edits on the Teletubbies article. I was fixing incorrect edits, not vandalizing. If you go back further than a week, you'll see that Andrew Davenport is the writer, not Joel Moore. Likewise, the Teletubbies' home is the "Tubbytronic Superdome," not the "Q". These were incorrect edits made a while ago which weren't caught. I'd appreciate it if you could revert the page to my last edit. Thanks. WikiJoeH 19:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! WikiJoeH 20:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Unused files / uncategorized images
Have you looked at Special:Unusedimages and Special:Uncategorizedimages recently (today)? Do you know why they were changed into galleries? Both are hideously bad as galleries and make patrolling a pain. I posted a message on WP:VPT and nobody has said anything. Have people complained about it on Commons at all? (By the way, congrats on making admin there - are you ready to try here again?) -- BigDT ( 416 ) 21:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: 'Last Warning'
Maybe you should tell the editors of the Fiona Forbes page -- the one you accused me of vandalizing -- to comment their edits properly. Then I won't undo them. I really hate dweebs like you who go around accusing people of vandalism when it's unsubstantiated, because it ruins the community. Anyway, enjoy all your 'power' and 'status' (pffft) as a Wikipedia mod. 24.80.117.217 16:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Barack Obama.jpg
Hi,

I was unable to access the OTRS URL, but I very suspicious of any claim to copyvio. The photograph is identical to Obama's official Congressional Portrait, which is the public domain. I know this because, as a contributor to his campaign, I have a signed copy on my wall. :) What was the claim made?  Best wishes, Xoloz 21:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

The image is in the public domain. Period. It should not be removed. If you would like me to delete the copy now, and download an identical one myself, I will. Best wishes, Xoloz 21:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 23rd, 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 06:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

OTRS Request
Hey- do you have the ability to look up a request and find out the status of it? Please see User talk:BigDT. This is about Image:Mundana300pixel.JPG, which was deleted because the permission given did not conform to the GFDL. Do you have the ability to search and find if/when permission was received to use this image? Thanks. --BigDT 14:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I appreciate it. --BigDT 17:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

No Child Left Behind Act
I'm confused, why did you request full protection for this article at WP:RFPP if all the vandalism was from IP addresses? WjBscribe 17:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Reliable source?
Mike Tyndall dot com (how the hell did this get spamblacklisted?) was just on Slashdot because it claimed that it recieved a legal threat from Goldman's law firm. I think that, as such, the claims are notable and relevant to the ongoing controversy. That this claim was made is verifiable on the web site in question (IF I COULD JUST LINK TO IT WTF?). -Fennec (&#12399;&#12373;&#12400;&#12367;&#12398;&#12365;&#12388;&#12397;) 21:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:GtaIV_timesq.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:GtaIV_timesq.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.

Please go to the image 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 '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 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. —  pd_THOR  undefined | 01:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:PFLive5.jpg
Hello. You deleted Commons:Image:PFLive5.jpg as a copyvio. We still have Image:PFLive5.jpg here, and also Image:PFLive4.jpg (also on commons). Can I ask what the problem was, and can you delete/tag the copies here if appropriate? Many thanks! Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Matt Sanchez
Do you mind? The information is well-documented, and you are simply arbitrarily removing it. The escorting allegations are central to the controversy about Sanchez and central to his notoriety. Aatombomb 04:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The content was referenced. Aatombomb 04:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Controversy with whom? The Self-righteous like you? No one cares Aatombomb, go find someone to bash you and move on. Matthew Sanchez 18:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

The Coulter picture was taken with my camera and is my property.Matthew Sanchez 18:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you ...
... for your prompt revert :) - A l is o n  ☺ 18:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Username reports
I'm a bit puzzled with your two recent reports on WP:RFCN. User:Brady Barbot, clearly a borderline case at best, and no real chance for confusion. I'm not sure why you bothered reporting this name to anyone - did you really think this was a bot? And then the other one with the random letters: next time you see a violation that obvious, just go straight to WP:AIV. I've seen people make misjudgements but it's kind of odd to see them in two opposite directions, as happened here. Mango juice talk 20:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * WP:AIV is okay for any clear violation. On occasion, those requests may be denied as borderline, in which case RFCN is a good place to go next.  Mango juice talk 13:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

User Category for Discussion
 A category created by you or to which you have significantly contributed is being considered for deletion, rename, move or merge in accordance with Wikipedia's Categories for Discussion policies. This does not mean that any of the userpages in the category will be deleted. They may, however, be recategorized. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this category's entry on the User categories for discussion page. VegaDark 22:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Either your messages are erroneous, or the tag is
includes a fair use statement, so why are you tagging images that include it as lacking a fair use rationale? Hawkestone 22:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Username Reports # 2
Just curious - why are you failing to follow the instructions set out in the username policy when reporting a username to requests for comment/usernames ? I also must ask if you could please try and limit reports to RFC/N purely to usernames that have edited, that are not vandalism only accounts, and which are fairly obviously in violation of our username policy. These are all potentially good users and should be treated with the exact same level of respect and tolerance you would show Jimbo, an admin or any established user. Thanks in advance. -- Nick  t  01:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mecu!
can you kindly unadopt me? it's only because i would like to adopt a user and i learned from the best! ;) the_undertow talk  07:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:RonaldErnestAitchison.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:RonaldErnestAitchison.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. —Angr 17:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

copyright status of PRC propaganda posters
Hi there, I posted this question on 'Can I use' (twice) and 'Media copyright questions' and got no response, so I thought I'd try you. I am trying to determine the copyright status of low-res images of political propaganda posters created in the People's Republic of China during the 1950's. This collection of posters and the site's copyright information and attribution policy seem to say that they would fall under GFDL and thatAttribution would apply, but images from the same site, which are currently being used in Criticize Lin, Criticize Confucius, Propaganda in the People's Republic of China and other Wikipedia articles are used under politicalposter as fair use. Any ideas on the actual status of these images? AFAIK the image I am looking to use was created in the mid-1950's, probably from artwork done by some artist working for the PRC and then reproduced extensively, the site consists of low-res scans of posters in the siteowner's collection, which are the images I want to use. Thanks!-- killing sparrows  (chirp!) 16:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I have no clue. This is a little too complex for me and probably most to understand and make a guess, which is probably why no one has responded to you before either. My best guess is for you to try and ask User:Gmaxwell whom is quite good with licenses, but even he may not know. Otherwise, make your best guess and proceed. That's all that most of us can do anyways. Sorry I couldn't help you. MECU ≈ talk 13:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Brewers2000logo.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Brewers2000logo.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Bigr Tex  21:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Shadow_Sonic06.png
I have tagged Image:Shadow_Sonic06.png 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. Bigr Tex  21:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Torrapaltlogo.gif
I have tagged Image:Torrapaltlogo.gif 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. Bigr Tex  21:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wing_zero.jpg
I have tagged Image:Wing_zero.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. Bigr Tex  21:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kansas_City_Chiefs_logo.png
I have tagged Image:Kansas_City_Chiefs_logo.png 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. Bigr Tex  23:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 30th, 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 06:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:ZhangZiyi_MemoirsGeisha.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ZhangZiyi_MemoirsGeisha.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there 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) 15:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Help Wanted
When you have time, can you copyedit Zile and remove the tag? Thanks--Ugur Olgun 21:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 7th, 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 06:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dick Anderson football.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Dick Anderson football.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 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

CSD I1
Please do not tag images which are not identical for deletion as redundant, as you did on Image:Boeing 707 engineview.jpg. Original, unedited images are still useful to keep around when an edit has been created. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 03:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Logo 20th century fox.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo 20th century fox.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 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 16:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 14th, 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 08:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:24-S3Promo-Reiko Aylesworth.jpg
You can delete this image. I cannot provide the information you want.

Also, does Image:Michelle day 4.jpg violate the fair use rules? It has been on Wikipedia for ages but now a user is claiming it does and wants it removed.