User talk:Mahagaja/Archive 27

Image:1133609060190.jpg
I have tagged Image:1133609060190.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. MER-C 09:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Reply about Image:CChaplin.jpg: delete it!
Hi Angr, thank you for reminding me about that image. I took it from Wiki Commons and copied their claimed tag. Apparently, it was not true and it is gone now. Please feel free to delete it anytime! Thank you. — Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 17:41, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello again, Angr. If you would like to do me a favor, may you please check the image Image:Enyafairusesmall.jpg that I uploaded please? It the fair use statement correct and enough? Thanks. — Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 17:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No; the thing is that Wikipedia policy does not allow nonfree images to be used to show what living people look like, because a free image could be made (even if none has yet been made). —Angr 18:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to delete Image:CChaplin.jpg now, or does it violate policy? I don't mind if it is also deleted. — Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 18:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It's possible to delete it now, but in fact it's highly likely the image is public domain. Chaplin looks quite young in the picture, so it's entirely possible the picture was published in the U.S. before 1923. If someone can track down evidence that this is so in the next seven days, the image can be kept (and taken back to Commons). —Angr 19:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Old High German consonants
Hi Angr, could you take a butchers at the new "other changes" section in High German consonant shift, which has been added after some discussion on talk there. Your feedback would be helpful. --Doric Loon 07:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Attack of the Five-Foot Cephalophobes!!
Thank you so very very much for reverting those changes! As you well know I wouldn't have been able to revert them myself (and, until a short while ago, I couldn't edit at all since my then Opera Mini IP had been blocked for being an open proxy) and it really makes me feel good to know that there are people willing to help me deal with this incredibly annoying and disruptive (among other labels) individual.

The articles do still have a few problems (like mentions of Ur-Bantu instead of Proto-Bantu, and I'm not knowledgeable enough of important differences) though this person's actions and the lack of response from fellow registered editors have rather discouraged me from making any further major changes.

The Sesotho phonology article has an ugly red link to IIRC voiceless velar affricate which you may like to investigate. I tried to pronounce it on the samples so you could tse that if you decide to write the article.

Tebello TheWHAT!!?? 00:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Deleted "Plot of Naruto: Shippūden"
Quick complaint/request at the deletion of Nar. article. I agree that this was a very long article for it's "niche" nature, but the series has yet to be reproduced in English (legally), and for someone (me) struggling with the Japanese versions it was incredibly useful. A plea for clemency? Vicarvictor 05/07/07
 * Dictionaries and travel guides are useful too, but like this article, they fall outside the scope of an encyclopedia. —Angr 06:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * On an additional note, why was that page deleted, but not Kakashi Gaiden - they are both just plot summaries? And because the talk page was deleted as well, I can not see any of the discussion involveed in deleting it.  Needless to say, I would like to know as well. -- ~|ET|~ (Talk) 03:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The discussion is at the AFD page, not the talk page; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plot of Naruto: Shippūden (2nd nomination). As to why the other was not deleted, I can't say, since I'm not the one who closed that discussion. —Angr 06:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

This way or that?
Hello Angr. Hope you've been well. I'm not completely done with our dispute of a week+ ago. Would you prefer to see what I have to say here or by email? JDG 15:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't really see that there's anything more to talk about. Let's get back to writing an encyclopedia. —Angr 15:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Plainly, I wouldn't have asked if I thought there was nothing more to talk about. I mentioned the possible consequences of a ban on the AN/I page... so, email or here? JDG 15:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Whichever you prefer. —Angr 15:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * After thinking a bit more about it, I believe email is the way to go. I'll hopefully have something to you by tonight. JDG 16:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kurt Waldheim color head photo.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Kurt Waldheim color head photo.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. After Midnight 0001 17:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem on that revert. With the huge backlog I've been treating "no rationale whatsoever" pretty liberally in favor of the uploaders, but I have been making exactly the same edit comment in all of them so that I can go back to them later for further review.  Still, I am probably deleting 98% of the ones I come across.  Once the backlog is gone, I'll take another pass through those and probably send the whole bunch to WP:PUI or WP:IFD. --After Midnight 0001 20:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:A teendanceordinancelol.jpg
Hey Angr, just to let you know, I marked Image:A teendanceordinancelol.jpg as a non-free album cover, which I agree that it definitely is. I'll leave it up to you to either leave the image on PUI or remove the tag. Cheers, Iamunknown 18:59, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

An admin experienced with Non-free content may be needed
Image:Imogen Heap-Speak For Yourself-Hide and Seek.ogg was tagged with no rationale and reverted several times by a user insisting boilerplates were sufficient. Another user then added a rationale that did not explain the specific situation, only saying that the file was necessary for critical commentary without specifying how it was necessary or what the commentary was. I marked it as disputed, and that was also reverted. I'm pretty sure admin intervention is necessary, because all I can do is revert edits, and I'll end up being accused of edit warring. Jay32183 22:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that the rationale is insufficient (I've never seen a fair use rationale that wasn't), and that boilerplate fair use templates are not rationales in and of themselves. However, you really shouldn't call it "vandalism" when people disagree with you. The current status quo looks about right to me; I'll watchlist the image to make sure it stays that way. —Angr 05:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Chris edwards
A template has been added to the article Chris edwards, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Duff 22:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If and when Chris Edwards becomes a disambig page, just have Chris edwards redirect there. I've added the R from other capitalisation template; such redirects are very common and often helpful. There's no reason to delete it. —Angr 05:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * ah! perfect. I had not thought through to the logical conclusion that upon the creation of the disambiguation page, the alternate capitalization would instead redirect to THERE.  of course.  Thank you, and also for the link to the wiki format guide on that as well.

ß
Hello, Angr. Is there a policy on en.wikipedia regarding the usage of ß vs ss in German words in article space? (Not a name, nor a quote, just a word. Question came up per this diff). Thank you in advance. ---Sluzzelin talk  10:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, unfortunately there is no policy that German has to be spelled correctly. —Angr 14:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. (I know, I know, we don't spell German correctly. ;-) )---Sluzzelin talk  15:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Happy Birthday
Politics rule 21:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

 ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:08, 07 July 2007 (UTC)
 * FROM YOUR FRIEND:

Laurel and Hardy
I found another free picture of them on the loc website but it's not a frontal shot and I'm not sure where to put it in. If you could do it I'd appreciate it. Looks like USO and other pictures of celebrities entertaining the troops could be useful for replacing unfree pictures of celebrities from the previous generation, evan as they are of today's celebrities. -N 15:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know where to put it either. Not only is it not a frontal shot, they're actually looking away from the camera. —Angr 15:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Saxony-Anhalt
Some time ago you pulled out of the WikiProject Germany because you felt it got too bureaucratic especially with all the emphasis on tagging and assessing. I wondered if you were willing to help out a little with all the changes going on in Saxony-Anhalt (Kreisreform Sachsen-Anhalt 2007) after all the districts have changed. Hope you can make an edit or two on the related articles. Agathoclea 19:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll do what I can. —Angr 19:30, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Adama_Season_3.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Adama_Season_3.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, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 05:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Johnny Depp pic
Sure, I'll delete the picture now. Sorry about the delay, I'm sure I've gone through the deletion backlog since you tagged that image, but I must have missed it for some reason. --Kwekubo 23:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:CChaplin.jpg
Hello again, Angr, I think you remember me, Andy. It is about Image:CChaplin.jpg. It has been over seven days since it was tagged as not haveing a source, so there is no reason to not delete the image. ''As I said, the original source came from the German Wikipedia or Commons, but they are gone. I cannot find the source.''

If you have a chance, please delete the image. Thank you! — Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 01:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

IPA help
I need a good English example of the /ðʲ/ sound, as in /ˈgoiðʲelg/. Is it also written /ð´/? If the two are the same, is its linguistic description "a palatized dental fricative"? Thanks in advance, I really need help sorting this out. -  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 14:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * English doesn't have the sound, but if you make an English [ð] while keeping your tongue in position for an [i], that's the sound you're going for. It is also written /ð´/: in the IPA, palatalization is marked with   after the consonant, but in traditional Celtic linguistics, it's written with ´ after the consonant. Its phonetic description is a palatalized voiced dental fricative. —Angr 15:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you, this helps a lot! I may be back with more questions :-) -  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 15:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, now I need IPA for Old Irish Áes, and Modern Irish Aos. I figure Mod.Ir. /i:s/? But the O.I... /a:e:s/? That doesn't look right... -  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 16:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Modern Irish is /i:s/ in Ulster and Connacht, /e:s/ in Munster. Old Irish is /ais/. —Angr 18:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You rock. -  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 18:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Rex
You can come here to discuss. Kingjeff 17:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Body-blows-cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Body-blows-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 03:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-fair use image
Hi Angr. Sorry to bother you with this, but I'm not familiar enough with which steps to take with an image with inaccurate fair use rationale used (in this case, Image:Joseph_greenberg.jpg), and I don't have time right now to figure it out, so I thought I'd at least let you know about it. Again, sorry to bother you. Take care, --Miskwito 20:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Blast from the past...
Hello! I'm sorry to bother you- but I have come across an issue with another user. I come to you on this, being that you and I had this issue several months back- in fact it is archived in your April archive. User Jeffrey_O._Gustafson has deleted images on a page I had worked on. One of the images had been previously deleted by you, but upon realizing that I had recieved permission under GFDL, you had restored the image.

This user did not tag the images, only deleted speedily- which I don't agree with, and apparently from the look of his talk page, others feel the same. I am still trying to resolve this matter with Jeffrey_O._Gustafson, though it seems to be going nowhere. I do not know if you would want to, or if it would be helpful for you to add your 2 cents to the discussion, but figured I could ask you either way. --YeLLeY511 22:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't exactly realize you had permission to use it under the GFDL, I took your word for it. You wrote that permission had been sent to the OTRS system, but the OTRS number was never added. Without that number, we can't verify that it's really used under GFDL. —Angr 05:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Permission had been sent to the OTRS system, but I never recieved an OTRS number... That was back in April I believe. -YeLLeY511 14:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Renaming that article
Hi Angr, you probably noticed this already, but another difficult user has stepped up to reverse your sensible renaming of Voßstraße. Sigh. Pro hib it O ni o ns (T) 07:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't. I don't keep it on my watchlist. —Angr 07:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:NewMetroRail logo.svg
Hi, I am the uploader for the Image, as concerned you have deleted the image Image:NewMetroRail logo.svg by the reason "Expired disputed fair-use image, concern was: no fair use rationale given". However in the Image page before the deletion, I've added the fair use relatione "The "New MetroRail" logo explaining the details for the New MetroRail article. Retrived from the last page in OnTrack magazine. ". Is that the fair use relatione is not sufficient? Also please concern that there's no free alternate images available. Shinjiman &#8660; &#9832; 14:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What you added is helpful additional source information, but it isn't really a rationale explaining why Wikipedia needs to use the image and why our use of the image should be considered fair. Please see WP:FURG for some guidelines on writing a rationale. —Angr 15:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use in New MetroRail article
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:
 * 1) It illustrates an infrastructure article about the entity that the logo represents.
 * 2) The image is used as the primary means of visual identification of the article topic.
 * 3) It is a rasterised low resolution scalable vector image, such that is is not suitable for production of non legitimate usage.
 * 4) The logo is not used in such a way that a reader would be confused into believing that the article is written or authorized by the owner of the logo, the Public Transport Authority of Western Australia.
 * 5) The logo is not replaceable, and there is no free alternates available.

How about if I add this fair-use relatione, is that enough to claim the image that is fair use for the New MetroRail article, which this follows of the guideline of the Fair use ralatione? Shinjiman &#8660; &#9832; 16:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that looks OK. I've undeleted it for you so you can add that rationale. —Angr 16:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot Angr, I've added the fair use relatione for the image to claiming the usage of the non free image. :) Shinjiman &#8660; &#9832; 16:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Image source problem with Image:NZ-Cloudy B.png
Sigh. Must've added pd rather than pd-self. Hope there aren't many more like that out there - I uploaded about 200 at the same time... Grutness...wha?  00:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Brendan Fehr as Michael Guerin in Roswell Season 3.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Brendan Fehr as Michael Guerin in Roswell Season 3.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 18:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

You are acting in a destructive fashion when it would be no harder to act in a constructive fashion
Why don't you write the fair use rationale? You can do it just as easily as me, and you are the one who has chosen to be active in this area. I will do nothing further to help to illustrate Wikipedia. When constructive efforts meet with a destructive response like yours, no further efforts on my part can be expected. Hawkestone 14:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I can't do it just as easily as you. First of all, there are thousands of non-free images from thousands of different uploaders that need rationales written for them. Expecting a handful of people to write them all is simply unrealistic. If everyone takes responsibility for the images he himself uploaded, they can be gotten through. Second, rationales have to be tailor-made to the specific use of the image in question in each article where it's used; someone unfamiliar with both the image and the article can't do it. Finally, I can't and won't write rationales I personally don't believe. Requiring that nonfree content comply with Wikipedia policy is not "destructive" in any way, but if you refuse to take responsibility for the images you uploaded, you can't complain if they get deleted. —Angr 16:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the lot. I'm past caring about the damage you do to Wikipedia. I was under no obligation to contribute. I did so as a public service. I regret making the effort to help Wikipedia, and will not waste any more of my time trying to leap through your hoops. Hawkestone 21:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:JointEuropeanTorus internal.jpg
Which part of "Image sourced from the EFDA-JET public relations page. According to the JET image page these images may be used free of charge for educational purposes. Copyright is held by EFDA-JET. Producing a free replacement is practically impossible as photographic access to the machine is extremely limited. Access to the internals of the machine are also strictly off limits to the public." does not explain the rational for the use of the image? Read the page next time. --CnlPepper 15:09, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:FURG for suggestions about what a fair use rationale needs. —Angr 09:05, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Source for Hermione Granger image
Just saw you closed the discussion here & deleted the Hermione Granger pic for the source not being clear.

I should clarify, I made an error in the link I gave in that discussion. As per the Harry Potter image listed two items further up, the correct link for the set at MovieWeb is http://www.movieweb.com/movies/film/56/2456/gal2535/ and the image is also available at IMDB http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373889/photogallery about 4 screens through, under "On the set Off the set Publicity Stills from our Studio Friends".

Hope this clarifies that the source is indeed a wide-distribution publicity still, not an exclusive for a single website; and that you'll therefore reinstate. Jheald 22:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Take a look at Publicity photos: "Publicity photos come from a very narrow range of sources, and are made available for distribution by promotional agencies, whereas many images that may appear promotional in nature are intended for commercial use by the image's copyright holder." The fact that you've found this photo elsewhere still doesn't prove it was made available for distribution by a promotional agency. Anyway, I've replaced the image with a free one now. —Angr 22:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

What to do about hostile editors?
See What can be done about User:Whathojeeves whose edits are hostile to people who do not agree with his preferred form of Cornish? -- Evertype·✆ 16:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, at Philip Payton he seems to be removing unsourced claims, for which the best remedy is to source them. When he adds unsourced claims, as at Ken George, the thing to do is remove them to the talk page until he provides sources. —Angr 16:13, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Fine, but it's persistent. See Cornish language for instance. I did take your advice at Nicholas Williams. -- Evertype·✆ 05:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Ootp066.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ootp066.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 23:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Trembling Before G-d
I have commented at Talk:Trembling Before G-d.--DLand TALK 13:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Dhu Nuwas
Hi, could you take another look at. I cant see what the image was so it is hard to know whether it was copyright at all or if fair-use applies, but given that it is likely to be extremely old, the educational benefit of the image, and that it is unlikely to be replaceable, I think that a fair use rationale is likely for the purposes of Dhu Nuwas. John Vandenberg 10:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The image had no information at all: no source, no license, nothing. It's also not undeletable since it was deleted in April 2006, before undeletion of images was possible. So at this point I'd say just look for a new image that's undeniably PD-old, and upload it with sufficient source information that others can verify it's PD-old. —Angr 10:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Erykah badu - bag lady.JPG
This is a pretty important single; If I provide rationale, can you restore the image? --Knulclunk 11:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've restored it. Please add both a rationale and a source. —Angr 17:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks! --Knulclunk 19:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale provided for Image:DominiquePoltergeist.jpg
I provided clear-cut rationale for the image and removed your tag. This photo should easily fall within the free-use guidelines, as the screen-cap is being used to illustrate Dominique Dunn and her role in Poltergeist, which was the most important and widely viewed role in her career. --Celtic Jobber 00:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's exactly the problem. The screen cap is being used to illustrate her. Screencaps can only be used to illustrate their films. —Angr 04:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Show me a specific policy that says a screencap from a film can't be used to illustrate an actor for whom the film was a major part of their career, or I have a feeling we'll have an edit war on our hands here. The picture is showing her in the film, and the film is mentioned in the article. If you want to remove all photos like that, then you'll be editing and tagging all day. People like you are ruining WikiPedia. --Celtic Jobber 07:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It's right there in the non-free film screenshot tag: "It is believed that the use of a limited number of web-resolution screenshots for identification and critical commentary on the film and its contents ... qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement." The article does not provide any identification or critical commentary on the film or its contents; the image is being used solely to show what she looked like. And keep your personal attacks to yourself. —Angr 16:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I feel like your erroneous edit on my image *is* a personal attack on me, especially when there are probably 1,000s (or millions) of similarily used images that you aren't tagging. --Celtic Jobber 01:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Update* I had a change of heart, and because I feel so strongly about this, I changed your tag to one requesting a fair use review. Please do not change this, and let someone who's not biased in the situation (I.E. not or you or me) make the final decision. Thank You. --Celtic Jobber 04:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You neglected to actually add it to WP:FUR, so I did. —Angr 06:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok thanks. --Celtic Jobber 06:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Íomhá Chathail
As I said in Gaelic it is free to Wikipedians. I don't know how to put it in 'Public domain', but if you can do it for me then thats great. Eog1916 20:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Bernese example
I'm not familiar with Bernese German orthography, so I don't know how the word drehen in SG is spelled in Bernese. If you know, do you think you could change it? Thanks. Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 19:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know either, that's why I used standard German orthography. —Angr 19:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh. Hmmm.  Well, when we find out we can change it, I guess.  Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 20:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)