User talk:RedWolf/2005 Archive

Re: Image:Bernini-a-d.jpg
OK, you got me. I uploaded this one in May 2003, at a time when I was, shall we say, less sensitive to copyright issues...

As far as I can tell my version is derived from this image or a copy thereof, and I can't verify fair use. I have therefore removed the image from the relevant page. Have a nice year.Lee M 03:54, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ...And added an external link to the original instead. Lee M 04:14, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks Lee. I have changed the tag to Unknown . RedWolf 00:13, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Thanks for all the work you do, and continue to do, on image tagging. Happy new year. – Quadell (talk) (help) 05:30, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

A (belated) Happy New Year to you as well. RedWolf 00:16, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)

Images from Bertrand's paradox
Hello & happy new year. You left a message about tagging some images I made. I've added license tags to each one. I'll keep my eyes open for other images I've made that need them -- not too many I hope! Regards & happy editing, Wile E. Heresiarch 06:08, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

African-American
RedWolf, please stop your bot. It is making improper corrections. See my points at Talk:Bankhead.&mdash; Ford 00:49, 2005 Jan 2 (UTC)

It seems a number of people have issues with your bot, please stop operating it until they are all resolved. More discussion at Wikipedia talk:Bots. -- Netoholic @ 18:52, 2005 Jan 2 (UTC)

:Image:Sykes-Picot bilevel work in progress.png
As the description says, this is a fair use image when used for the purpose given. Source information is also given, as is the fair use rationale. Jamesday 16:11, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Natural features categories
Just wanted to say thanks for all the work you're doing on moving items around in the "X natural features" -> "Natural featurs of X" category changes that I initiated. It's much appreciated! Grutness|hello? 07:55, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Computer role-playing game categorization
Just curious.... I noticed you removed the CRPG categorization from a number of Final Fantasy pages (Final Fantasy II, Final Fantasy IV, etc.). I was just wondering why. -Seancdaug 11:42, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * Category:Final Fantasy is a subcategory of the CRPG category so having the FF articles in CRPG is redundant. RedWolf 17:11, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

Geo-stubs
Hi RedWolf - I've been busy moving generic geo-stubs into their subcategories (Africa-geo-stub, UK-geo-stub, etc). Seems that every time I move a few from the category, you move a few new ones in (particularly African ones). Can I ask you to please put them into their subcategories? Cheers, Grutness|hello? 03:15, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Usually happens when I change . Africa? Perhaps Antartica. I don't see a stub category for that continent. RedWolf 03:20, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * Most recent one I dealt with was Amguid crater, in Algeria. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]]


 * Oh yea, forgot I had done some cleanup on Algeria. I wasn't really aware that the geo-stub has been split itself. Now that I know I'll start to use the more specific ones. Perhaps there should still be one for Antarctica? RedWolf 01:46, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks - you're right, there probably should be an Antarctica one. At the moment I'm looking through generic geo-stubs seeing what countries/regions have the most stubs. Antarctica and Indonesia look like the two most likely to need their own sections next - each have about 100. Geo-stub still exists as a category, but there were over 4000 stubs in there - far too many to wade through for a quick look. I'm trying to get it down to about 1000 with the rest bundled away into subcategories, some of which have been around for a while, but most of which were virtually empty. All the ones that currently exist are listed in a table at the top of Category:Geography stubs. Thanks again, Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]]


 * There's now an ! :)  Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 11:10, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Endurance Images
Sorry about that...I've inserted the source for the Image:Endurance (II).jpg, but haven't been able to find where I got the Image:Endurance (I).jpg from. I've uploaded another one, making sure that I added the source to the page, so the first can be deleted. Thanks for letting me know User:Hammersfan - 19/1/05, 18.02

No, the Image:Endurance (I).jpg image didn't come from the Royal Navy's website. As for the Image:Endurance (II).jpg image, I'll get it sorted ASAP. User:Hammersfan - 21/1/05, 10.05

Mountain pics
Thanks for uploading so many great mountain pics to Wikipedia! Is it much of burden to carry a good camera with you when you're mountain climbing? I've never climbed anything bigger than a hill, but I imagine any extra weight - especially the fragile kind - would be unwelcome.

I'm glad your wikistress is going down a bit. All the best! – Quadell (talk) (help) 21:16, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * Yea, you definitely try to keep the weight down as much as possible. In the mountains, it's always best to be prepared, so carrying emergency items is a pain weight wise but I can live with that. Until one has to carry several litres of water in their pack for hours, does one realize how heavy water really is. As for the camera, I used to take a metal body Mamiya with a metal body telephoto lens for many years. I finally switched to a lightweight Canon Rebel and telephoto lens and definitely noticed the difference.


 * It helps to reduce stress when one finally gets bit of nice weather in the winter. While Atlantic Canada and NE USA were dealing with snow on the weekend, we finally had a nice sunny day with temps rising to near freezing (that's mild for us at this time of year). RedWolf 00:47, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of categories that won't delete
Just FYI, there's a template that somebody put together for articles and categories that can't be deleted due to "block-compressed revisions". See Template:Pending deletion. -Aranel (" Sarah ") 15:05, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I saw it once but could not remember the name of the template when I ran into the issue again yesterday. It was not on the list of deletion templates. RedWolf 00:36, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

User IDs
Even if all you have is User IDs and you can't get the name, it would still be very useful to have the list of images grouped by User ID. It would look better with a name, but it would be almost as useful to not have that. – Quadell (talk) (help) 19:28, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * Big problem overall here. I only download the current revision of the database so after tagging images, the current revision no longer contains the original uploader id. One would need to download the old revisions as well which are extremely large. RedWolf 21:03, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

Image sleuthing
There's a new project in town called Image sleuthing, and you are hereby invited to become an official image sleuth. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 00:47, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

Usage of numbers
You asked (Talk:Atlanterhavsveien) about the length of a road. As it is a long time ago, I'm letting you know here. The answer is that Norwegian numbers are written differently from English when it comes to the usage of "," and ".". --hans 13:07, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image permission
I noticed that you've tagged my "Beautiful britain.." images with unverified. I have obtained permission from the copyright holder by email. What do you want me to do? Please reply on my talk page. Thanks! Lupin 18:43, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deletion candidate
I would like to know why you consider Image:WindowMaker-0.80.1-FreeBSD-4.10.jpg to not be a candidate for speedy deletion. Criteria for speedy deletion says "An image which is a redundant (all bits the same or scaled-down) copy of something else on Wikipedia and as long as all inward links have been changed to the image being retained" is a candidate for speedy deletion. There are already two other screenshots at Window Maker, one of 0.80.2 and one of 0.91.0.

My screenshot is clearly not needed anymore and should be removed.

Darrien 06:33, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)


 * Note the "all bits the same". The other images were not listed so I have no basis to confirm that the images are exactly the same. RedWolf 06:57, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)


 * The "all bits the same" is an example, the wording only indicates that images need be "a redundant ... copy of something else on Wikipedia". In this case, two other better and more recent screenshots make my old one redundant. It is not being used on any page, and hasn't been for some time.


 * Darrien 07:42, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)


 * I did place it on Images and media for deletion so it will be deleted in a week anyways, unless someone objects. Feel free to add your comments to that page. If others agree, then I will include it in my decision on future sd candidates. According to what I understand, images that are exactly the same but in different image formats, also do not qualify for speedy deletion. RedWolf 07:46, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

London categories
Please don't change the names of any more London categories unless you are prepared to do considerably more of the spadework of moving articles than you have done for London districts. There are 380 articles to transfer in this case! All for the sake of a microscope and debatable semantic "improvement". I've put a great deal of effort into the London menu, but I don't exactly relish making another 380 edits just now. Isn't it possible for an administrator to change a category name? By the way, Districts of London, would be better British English than Districts in London which sounds awkward to my ear. Philip 23:26, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I've now had a look at the discussion. I do not accept that a consensus was reached for a change. Furthermore, all of the votes for the name you have chosen came from non-British voters who were presumably unaware of correct British English usage. I don't think it is acceptable for North Americans to rename British categories with titles which appear semi-literate to users of British English. I am therefore going to empty your new category. If you can change the existing one to Districts of London, please go ahead, but please don't just create a new category unless you are prepared to transfer the 381 articles yourself. Philip 23:47, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I created that category with the intent of moving them with my bot. However, a MediaWiki software update within the past day has disabled my bot for now so I was not able to proceed with the move. I wasn't about to do nearly 400 moves manually. I of course saw the discussion but overall the consensus was to rename. The category was placed on cfd on December 22 and consensus was reached well after the normal 7 day period. The renaming is to try and follow a standardized naming convention. I don't know why you are complaining to me when you should be making your case on CFD. RedWolf 00:09, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)


 * There was most certainly not a consensus as to what to rename the category, and the transfer of this listing to the section marked "The following easily passsed or otherwise had no opposition" was illegitimate. The voting was as follows:


 * No change - 1 vote
 * In agreement that the existing capitalisation is inappropriate, but no preference for a new name stated - 2 votes (these might be taken to be votes for "London districts", but certainly not for "Districts in London")
 * Preference for Districts of- 2 votes (to which I add mine, making 3 votes)
 * London districts - 1 vote
 * Districts in London - 1 vote


 * Therefore you implemented a change which had 14.7% support (now 12.5% support). How can you justify that? Despite my preference for "Districts of" it seems to me that the voting does not actually authorise any change at all. Philip 03:09, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Districts in London had 3 written plus implicitly 4th with my creation of the category. I don't even see your name on CFD for this category. As far as my current involvement in renaming, this is on hold until my bot is able to make changes again on Wikipedia. I recommend that you make your objections known on CFD and not here before other bots continue the renaming. RedWolf 03:50, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * That is not true and even if it was, it would still not be a majority, never mind amounting to the proposal having "easily passed" or faced no opposition, which are the proper criteria for inclusion in the section of the votes for deletion page in which it was placed. The British English issue would still apply too. I have made my vote today, so it is valid if yours is. Your action in implementing a change which does not have democratic backing is a clear breach of policy. I had hoped that you were simply acting on someone else's removal of the category to the "votes decided" section, but now it seems that you consider that you are entitled to override the outcome of a vote. I have noted the situation on the categories for deletion page. I am very disappointed that an administrator should put the defence of his own actions before the correct implementation of Wikipedia policy.Philip 04:55, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Are you looking at the same page I am? I'm looking at Categories_for_deletion. RedWolf 06:29, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Tagging images moved to Commons
Ah... Thanks for the explanation. I'll try to remember that. I believe that I acquired a nasty habit of adding a "speedy" everywhere, from the pl-Wiki where we still don't have a firm policy on what is and what is not a speedy deletion candidate. I have been thinking of writing a draft of the rules based on what we have here on en-Wiki for some time now, though. Maybe this "incident" will motivate me. ;) Cheers, TOR 11:58, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Moving images from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons
Hi. I'm a little confused about how to correctly move images from here to the Commons, without losing information or violating the GFDL. I've started a discussion at Talk:Wikimedia Commons, and your input would be appreciated. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 19:52, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

WP:AN
Sorry, didn't grok your comment about "I really don't think this comment applies to this topic." Did you mean that you thought I had miscategorized that "Improper speedy deletion" entry? I was thinking that only points of some policy interest, etc were for "General", which is why I moved it to /Incidents. (I turned the old section header into a bolded text to keep the size of the TOC for the main board page down.) Noel (talk) 23:58, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:ArgyleStreetHalifax
HI,

you mentioned that Image:ArgyleStreetHalifax.jpg was invalid... however, it appears perfectly well to me, so I'm not sure what I should do. This image is also on Commons, in case that helps. Peregrine981 11:11, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * It was Image:ArgyleSteetHalifax.jpg (note missing "r"). RedWolf 01:00, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

Database dump
And verily, there was a new one. If you're still up for untagged image games... You might want to check out the comments here --Tagishsimon (talk)
 * There seems to be a problem with the English db dump. It's not listed but I figured out the name and downloaded it anyways. Uncompression fails. RedWolf 04:18, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

Freedom Force
Thank you for your edits. I seldom remember to edit things except at work, which is obviously a bad time to be looking up information on a game. *wry grin* Probably not so good to be using work resources to update Wikipedia either, but that's another problem. Out of curiousity, are you primarily paraphrasing existing information on the characters, or are you kind of freehanding it? -Fuzzy 04:27, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. You will have to be more specific. I vaguely recall editing some FF article but it was probably a link edit, a category change or something minor. Other than that, I don't plan on assisting directly with any content on that subject. RedWolf 04:58, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * My apologies. The entry was Freedom Force (computer game) and looking at it again, you'd made the change before the latest one, changing the category, that change being made by CanisRufus, your bot alter ego, I believe. The changes I was referring to were made by an IP address. And the plot thickens... Feel free to delete this conversation thread afterwards, as it essentially serves no purpose. -Fuzzy 06:12, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Mt Damavand image and others
The image is fairuse, merely because I know the photographer, and I wish his name to be given credit for. I'm doing this because I dont want other websites to take these images, and claim copyrights for them, without even using the photographer's name, which seems to be the case already. Afshain Bakhtiari works for Iran's Cultural Heritage Organzation, an official Iranian government organization that publishes such images for publicity purposes. I have done photography for them as well, and I can tell you that they are not concerned with Copyright issues, especially for non-proprietary reasons, like this Encyclopedia. They only care about the dissemination of Iran's proper image, especially outside Iran's borders.

I also saw copies of this picture on the web. However, Afshin is the photographer of this picture, and therefore all other images you see on the web are copies of this. I scanned this particular image from a hard copy myself that I have at my resource. That is why the colors seem a bit sharper than those on the web.

In fact, The Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization gives you these images for free, if they know you will use them for academic purposes. Which I gather this is. Isnt it?--Zereshk 20:46, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

South Shetland stubs
Hi RedWolf - just a quick note to say that there is a separate Antarctica-geo-stub template for use with subantarctic islands, if you're planning to make more South Shetland articles! Grutness|hello? 09:06, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Calcutta -> Kolkata name change
Hi there. I noticed you voted in the Naming policy poll to keep the Wikipedia policy of naming an article with the most familiar English name. You may not be aware that another attempt has begun to rename the Calcutta article to Kolkata, which is blatantly not the most common name of the city, whether it's official or not. If you want to vote on the issue you can do so at Talk:Calcutta. Cheers. -- Necrothesp 13:28, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Norman L. Bowen
Hi - when I did the re-write on the page I wasn't sure of the correct procedure for the copyvio thing. Hopefully I didn't mess things up with the re-write. Vsmith 03:56, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. If re-writing a copyvio, please use the temporary page as indicated in the copyvio text. Updating the original article text causes more work for administrators because the copyvio must still be deleted from the article's history. By using the Temp page for the re-write, the original article with the copyvio in it's history can be deleted and the Temp re-write can replace it. In that way, no copyvio in the history. It just makes life easier for admins if the copyvio process is followed as explained. Nothing really get messed up but the page history doesn't accurately reflect the article's edit history. That's why I copied it to the talk page before deleting it. RedWolf 04:08, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, next time I'll try reading the directions. Sorry 'bout the extra hassle. Vsmith 04:24, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The Brier
FWIW, we're having a discussion on the article naming of the Tim Hortons Brier, where you left a note about the naming of the article. 132.205.15.43 05:40, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've added my 2 cents on the subject. RedWolf 06:02, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

How can I then get rid of images in en: that should be on Commons
You said for Image:Finnmark kart.png: Images moved to Commons cannot be speedy deleted. I have uploaded an improved version of this image (and 18 related images) to the commons. Do I need to go through the ifd process for these? Sounds a wee bit silly, if you ask me. After all, I uploaded these myself.

We may soon be in the situation where we will have around 100 coats of arms for Municipalities of Norway which will be obsoleted by better images on the commons. Does all of there 100 images need to go through ifd? -- Egil 07:24, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * just list them all together on ifd with one discription of why they are obsolete and let them be deleted if noone objects. the problem we had was people were copying images to commons and speedying them here and we were losing source information in the process. Plugwash 09:20, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I'll do that (when that time arrives). I might add that it is the images in the commons that has the proper source information. Thanks. -- Egil 09:38, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Fwolinseal.gif
Thanks for pointing out to me that that image is going to be deleted. I thought it had already been deleted, actually. It's redundant to the one used in the Olin College article, and the image actually used is properly taged (it's fair use as a logo). --L33tminion | (talk) 17:52, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Reply
No, my computer has an error, so I'm not aware of what's happening. I intended to fix it as an disambig, and I've fixed it already.

Mr Tan 10:32, Mar 14 2005 (UTC)

Category:Aboriginal peoples in Quebec
Hello, I've responded to your question to me about the proposed move of Category:Native peoples of Quebec to Category:Aboriginal peoples in Quebec on Categories for deletion. It's unclear to me what the timetable for the approval of this move is. The old category is empty after depopulation by another user before the name change was deemed required. Once it has been moved or a new category created it can be repopulated. What steps remain for the Category to be moved by an administrator? Thanks, Kurieeto 19:33, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. To move a category, one creates a category by the new name and then changes the category of the articles in the old category to the new one. The move of articles is typically done by bots but can be done manually as well. Go ahead and create the new category yourself and populate it. There is normally at least a 7 day waiting period before the request is acted upon. Since the request was made March 10, it can now be processed. RedWolf 03:03, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Lul-logo.png
If you look at point 7 of WP:CSD, you'll notice that I was correct in putting it up for speedy deletion. "Any page which is requested for deletion by the original author, provided the author reasonably explains that it was created by mistake, and the page was edited only by its author." --BesigedB (talk) 12:34, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, you are correct. I was doing a whole bunch of CSD cleanup and since you mentioned that the image was on Commons, I just changed the request to IFD and didn't check the page history that time. RedWolf 17:18, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

GIF version of PNG not a speedy deletion candidate?
Hi RedWolf. I noticed you didn't think Image:C-moe.gif was a candidate for speedy deletion. I guess it depends on how you interpret "all bits the same" at Criteria for speedy deletion. I wonder if it would be fair to change it to "all pixels the same". I've asked at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Cheers, dbenbenn | talk 21:02, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Technically "all the bits are the same" is not true when different image formats are involved. While most images are going to appear pretty much the same when converted, all things being equal, sometimes a conversion to another format can look worse. So, not a clear cut case for SD. RedWolf 23:18, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * with a properly done conversion from gif-png all bits of the image and of its pallette will be IDENTICAL. What other bits were you thinking might be of significance? (conversions involving lossy formats are a very different issue)Plugwash 00:33, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I am referring to the literal meaning of "all bits not the same". JPEG, GIF formats are not identical to PNG, regardless of whether they may appear visually identical. RedWolf 09:02, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Korean Ceramics vs Pottery
I noticed you changed a category on the Korean Pottery page from Korean Ceramics to Pottery. This has been a subject of discussion with the Korean contributors who are apparently just beginning a long series of articles on clay products and history. They seem to strenuously object to the word pottery being applied to any clay object other than wheel produced work. And they insist that ceramics is the only term for Korean ware.

Another contributor and I have been writing them notes, trying to convince them that we are not vandalizing their work by changing the titles and categories to help people find their emerging articles. If you would look at the Pottery discussion, the Korean Pottery discussion and the Korean user's discussion pages( POofYS ), you will get a whiff of this apparent cultural misunderstanding. I've tried to assure them that once they get their articles into Wiki - we'll construct a clay oriented tree which will deal with some/all of their concerns. In the meantime -- I am going to add their Korean Ceramics category back and keep the Pottery one as well. Anything you can do to smooth these fussy waters would be good - as we would benefit from good Korean information on this subject. Comments welcome. WBardwin 07:31, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for responding. The Korean people (junior government functionaries, I think) will strenuously object when they come back -- usually at several day intervals.  I think they might be responsible for a number of other sketchy Korean articles as well.  I'm relatively new and I don't check the deletion questions.  And I'm afraid they don't understand Wiki enough to even know there is a voting mechanism.  If we can keep it for them, I think it would be better in the long run.  If we can't, you might write them a note trying to explain.  Their site is POofYS.  WBardwin 07:41, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm not going to create it again myself. If it does get created again, the correct name would be Category:Ceramics of Korea to follow convention of avoiding the adjective form which causes issues. RedWolf 07:49, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Testttttttttttt
Can you delate this;Testttttttttttt. I was just testing my written. User:Albanau


 * Deletion pending due to block compressed revisions. RedWolf 08:45, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Red Wolf, wait up: this sneaky little rat Albanau redirected the Origin of Albanians article to this blank page, and now the blank page is being deleted. The article Origin of Albanians was a legitimate article. Decius 08:53, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This is vandalism of the First Order, and this calls for User:Albanau to be banned. Decius 08:54, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

See the bottom of User talk: Cyrius also, where Albanau's previous actions are discussed. Decius 08:56, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * (added after edit conflict) Hi RedWolf. I noticed that Testttttttttttt had a significant history; the version before Albanau's edits looks like a fully-developed article. It looks to me like this article was at Origin of Albanians; then at  Albanau moved it to Testttttttttttttt ((cur) (last) 08:28, 27 Mar 2005 Albanau (Origin of Albanians moved to Testttttttttttttt)) which he then moved to Testttttttttttt ((cur) (last) 08:29, 27 Mar 2005 Albanau (Testttttttttttttt moved to Testttttttttttt)). I reverted it to the last version with content and will now move it back. I'm a new administrator so please tell me if I have this wrong. Thanks! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 09:02, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You are 100% right Seeker of Knowledge, and furthermore User:Albanau deliberately did this in order to illegally delete a Wikipedia article that upset his nationalistic fantasies. The article was legitimate, created by User:Bogdangiusca, and fully provided with references for each point. User:Albanau is to be banned from Wikipedia immediately, and this is not his first act of vandalism. Decius 09:09, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I have to agree with all of this. Albanau's actions are vandalism, pure and simple. RickK 09:13, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the updates. I did find it strange that I got the block compressed revisions error on an article that was supposedly just created. The vandalism instigated by User:Albanau warrants at least a block. I'm not familiar with any other vandalism he/she may have done but if this is not the first case, then a ban may be in order. He caught me while I was in the middle of a mass categories cleanup and I kept getting the new messages alert after everything I did (does a null edit cause that?) and it was getting annoying. RedWolf 09:16, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Places in Hong Kong
I would like to know why category:Places in Hong Kong was tagged with CFD? This category is equivalent to neighbourhoods. The term neighbourhoods is unheard in Hong Kong. &mdash; Instantnood 12:36, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * Its parent is currently listed on CFD and the subcats were nominated as well but weren't tagged according to procedure. RedWolf 01:33, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Titus (mountain)
I added this stub during my reading about bivouac. It really needs help, but there is so much skiing marketing and suchlike, I'm not even sure if that's the right mountain mentioned in 1877 (or whatever year the article lists). Are you able to give this article some help? Thanks Avriette 21:22, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I have searched in the past for this mountain but so far haven't found anything definitive that confirms what the 1911 EB claimed. I'm skeptical that it would be this mountain, primarily because it's in North America and not Europe or Asia. RedWolf 05:07, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

Jason Falkner
I see you made a change to the Jason Falkner page, are you a fan? Apologies if this is the wrong place for a question of this nature.
 * Not a fan. I just disambiguated rock is all. RedWolf 17:16, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

Where did the discussion go?
Notice you removed the discussions over Category:Culture of mainland China from the Cfd. For one, it seems too premature to do so. And for another, the discussion just dissappeared! ;) Was there a mistake somewhere?--Huaiwei 12:36, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I just moved the discussions to Categories for deletion/unresolved China. Currently, everything related to the China naming conventions just ends up being unresolved after weeks on CFD as everyone just re-votes the same as they did for the other China related categories. I'm going to be moving China related categories listed on CFD to there until the naming conventions issue is finally resolved. I wish people would stop listing China related categories until the naming issue is resolved. I'm not involved in the debate and I have no desire to be so entwined. RedWolf 05:04, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

List of mountains
Really useful list of mountains over at WikiProject Mountains! It made me run through all mountains in Category:Sierra Nevada, Category:Oregon mountains, Category:Washington mountains, and most of Category:California mountains and added to their Talk pages. If you'd like, you can regenerate the list: I added ~30 peaks. Thanks! -- hike395 14:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I tagged quite a few more myself and have regenerated the list &rarr; now at 485. Will have to wait until a new database dump is available before doing the next update. RedWolf 21:21, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Conversion of Mountain infobox to use coor template
Hi, RedWolf. If you'd like to comment, we're discussing the conversion of the Mountain infobox over to use coor templates (for external links to a bunch of mapping sites). Please see Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Mountains. Thanks!! -- hike395 15:15, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Request for your bot
Just noticed your bot work on the Loan and Investing categories. Thanks a lot for taking care of that, btw. Is there any way you can run a bot on Category:Currencies to move all of the national currencies to Category:National_currencies? If necessary, I'll do any sort of prep work you need done... ie, flagging non-national currencies to stay. I'm trying to make the currencies section much more user friendly. Feco 03:39, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I went through the currencies with my bot and manually selected an appropriate category as I thought would fit. After I was done I noticed that many were now in both categories. It seems a number of templates are being used to place articles into Category:Currencies. You would need to change those templates although some pages using the template may not belong in Category:National currencies. I leave it up to you to decide how to best tackle that problem. If you decide to change the category in the templates, you may run into a caching issue with article remaining in the original category. I can run my bot again to fix this if you have need of this operation. RedWolf 04:28, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

Yet another bot request
Hi RedWolf. I have been using a new template to add links to biography for all Canadian people. Unfortunately, I got the text slightly wrong, and was using the template with subst: to save stress on the server. Anyway, if possible I need occurences of:

Biography at the Canadian Dictionary of Biography Online

Changed to:

Biography at the Dictionary of Canadian Biography Online

Your help is much appreciated. Cheers, Fawcett5 12:46, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * By the way, the affected articles are all in the following categories:

- -  -  -  -  .  Fawcett5 13:37, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * This request has been completed. About 80+ articles were updated. You can see the bot's (CanisRufus) list of contributions for the article names. The bot had problems with articles with diacritical marks in them so was not able to check/update them. RedWolf 08:01, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

RedWolf, thank you very much, the results look very good! Regards, Fawcett5 14:03, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rivers
is your bot changing categories like chinese rivers into Rivers of China? I did Korea and Turkey by hand, but now saw some activity of your bot in Rivers of Asia. For China and Russia to do it by hand might be too much. regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 11:27, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, my bot can easily move articles from one category to another which I did for several of the continent categories of Rivers yesterday. I was not aware that some of these subcats were nominated for renaming on CFD. RedWolf 02:51, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Category:The Greatest Canadian
Hi. Please see this. Thanks. --Doradus 02:23, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

Are you interested in being a Bureaucrat?
Hi, I am considering nominating you to become a Bureaucrat. The role would involve giving administrator or bureaucrat access to other users following consensus on Requests for adminship. Although there are currently 18 bureaucrats, it may be helpful to have a few more. If you would accept a nomination, please let me know. Kingturtle 04:27, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. After thinking this over a while, I will defer any further consideration of this until the fall. My wiki presence will lessen over the summer months (I hope!). I also don't regulary follow the Admin request page. RedWolf 06:12, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of Category:Italian-American mobsters
I'm sorry to bother you however it appears your CanisRufis bot has changed all articles in Category:Italian-American mobsters to Category:American mobsters. I couldn't find any record of its deletion and was wondering if you knew anything about it ? While I recently moved those articles from Category:Italian-American criminals to the preexisting Italian-American mobsters they should be moved to the former category in Italian-American criminals if the American mobsters sub categories are planned to be deleted. Again sorry to have bothered you and thanks for your time. 209.213.71.78 15:56, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * See Categories for deletion/Log/2005 April 15 for discussion of the deletion. American mobsters are not scheduled for deletion so that's why I had the bot move them there. RedWolf 00:57, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm curious, given the discussion on the topic of ethnicity categories, are there plans to delete the other ethnic subcategories as well ? I only mention this because the category was pretty crouded before and had more then enough to sort by nationality given the noticible differences of each group though organization, history, time period, etc. 209.213.71.78 20:32, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * If there are other similar ethnic groups using the same over-categorization, they will likely be deleted as well as precedents have now been set for Italian-Americans and Jewish-Americans. The categories that were deleted were better served by lists. RedWolf 03:28, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

Prusik knot
Hi, You seem to have uploaded an image under the name of image:PrusikKnot.jpg, but it was deleted for lack of copyright info. If you can supply it, it'd be a candidate for undeletion. --Smack (talk) 04:47, 1 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi. No, I was not the uploader (I even checked the page history). RedWolf 04:51, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

Substituting templates
Hi RedWolf, I noticed you placed &#123;&#123;idw-uo&#125;&#125; on User talk:SparqMan (diff). Don't forget to use &#123;&#123;subst:(template)&#125;&#125; for these, because (as happened in this case) the template was accidentaly blanked. Thanks, Alphax &tau;&epsilon;&chi; 00:52, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Template:Mountain
That's fine: I just changed many of the talk page templates over with the understanding that if the change was undesirable they would be reverted. – ClockworkSoul 13:13, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Category:Islamic terrorist organizations
Hi, it appears you listed Category:Terrorist organizations for deletion back in March. From what I understand, there was a lengthy recategorization discussion, but I don't know where that is. I bring it up because I have just noticed that there is still this category: Category:Islamic terrorist organizations, which would have been a subcategory of the other, and hence also should have been recategorized. FWIW, I oppose such categories, as I oppose stating in the editorial voice that groups are "terrorists"; I believe that it is an opinion that should be attributed, hence such categories as those above are inherently POV. If this issue is not on your radar, forgive me for bringing it up on your talk page. -- Viajero 16:33, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I believe I may have tagged it for deletion only after someone else listed it on CFD without tagging it. I think the category you listed and other related cats are now up for deletion on CFD. RedWolf 06:10, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

Interwiki Bots
Hi RedWolf. I've been thinking over the recent number of interwiki bot requests and I feel that introducing a more restrictive policy would slightly benefit the Wikipedia. I'd be delighted to hear your thoughts on the matter. Please see my comments regarding this matter at: Village_pump_%28policy%29. Thank you for your time. -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:22, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

EPs category?
While working on some band releases I came across with a problem: I know that there are categories especially created to order albums, and singles, but what about EPs? I thought I could use but I was wrong. We don’t have as we do with albums and singles. So, how am I supposed to classify Extended Plays? Regards, Luis María Benítez 22:42, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * See WikiProject Albums. EPs are classified as albums. There is a special color for them. RedWolf 02:58, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

Kala Patthar
Hi RedWolf. My spelling of Kala Patthar is based on the odd sign / pamphlet I saw in Gorak Shep (I think the spelling of this on Wikipedia of "Gorakshep" is incorrect though I haven't changed it. I have never seen it spelt as one word and doubt this is a translation issue. What do you think??) in October 2004 and a map I brought back with me (published by Sherpa Maps). I guess this could be one of those where there are two translations from the Nepalese name though I think it is generally spelt with an "h". I changed it because I assumed the spelling "Kala Pattar" was a typo. However, if you feel strongly, feel free to change it back.

I've had a good stab in the last couple of days at adding info to Namche Bazaar. Am planning over the coming weeks on adding more information on other points of interest along the Base Camp trail and possible an Everest Base Camp Trek page (though this has been written loosely about in wikitravel). Also plan to upload photos.

Good to se I'm not the only one here who's been to Base Camp. When are you off to Kili?? jxs97s 13:44, 27 May 2005 (BST)

Image quality, Commons
The comments currently at the top of this page explains the low resolution of your Image:Sagarmatha ck Oct18 2002.jpg. Having a somewhat better resolution would be nice, of course, although the main problem with the image are the compression artifacts that make the picture look pretty awful. However, the reason I am writing this is a question I didn't find answered anywhere: Could you please upload your GFDL images to commons, so WPs in other languages can use them as well? Rl 09:01, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * The image is already on Commons using the same file name - Commons:Image:Sagarmatha ck Oct18 2002.jpg. I originally uploaded that image on here quite a while back before the automatic thumb sizing so I purposely cut it back so it would display fine in the infobox. I wouldn't consider the current image "pretty awful" &mdash; looks decent on my Mac. I will consider re-uploading at a higher resolution but no guarantees at this point. My main concern is the commercial use of the image as I noted at the top. RedWolf 02:54, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Volcanoes of Ecuador
The Andes in Ecuador are divided into three ranges that were created at different geological times. That's why there are three categories. People generally classify the volcanoes in Ecuador that way. Don't delete the categories. 2004-12-29T22:45Z 02:05, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Image of Anita Hill
Hi, I've just found out that in February you added a template to Image:A_Hill.jpg saying that the photo is being "considered for deletion". Have you read the corresponding talk page? What more do you want / do we here at Wikipedia need for an image to stay?

Best wishes,  01:07, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)


 * The talk page implies that the image (Image:A Hill.jpg) cannot be used for commercial use which is not allowed under GFDL. Someone has apparently changed the template (after I originally applied it to the image in question) to denote that non-commercial uses images are now being considered for deletion. So, you will either have to find an image that can be used for commercial purposes, get permission for commercial use or eventually the image will be deleted. RedWolf 02:59, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

Adams Island
I am confused about data on (sub-antarctic) Adams Island. You wrote that the island is at -66.55°N, 92.58333°W and someone added it as the part of Auckland Islands, which is far away of Auckland Island (-50.7°N, 166.08333°W). It seems that Adams Island which you described is some other island? --Millosh 01:59, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm sure there are several islands by that name across the world. If someone provides more information about Adams Island of the Aucklands, then eventually Adams Island will become a disambiguation page for Adams Island (Antarctica) and Adams Island (New Zealand). RedWolf 02:54, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

OK. Adams Island which you described is not the part of Auckland Islands. So, I'll remove Adams Island from the list of Auckland Islands inside of List of antarctic and sub-antarctic islands. --Millosh 04:55, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Copy vio?
Where do I state that the pictures are not a copy vio? I thought I did that by checking the box required prior to upload? Do I just state this verbally in the summary box? Thanks.--MONGO 20:31, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nevermind...little bit slow on my part...I labelled the picture correctly now...thanks.--MONGO 20:53, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I appreciate your assistance. I will make sure my uploads are in commons for now on. The picture I inserted for Elliott Knob isn't a great one, being from a 35mm instamatic camera and being over 10 years old...I'll probably put a note in the discussion page that anyone that can find a better shot to replace mine if they wish. Anyhow, I'm learning as I go so thanks again for your help.--MONGO 28 June 2005 06:54 (UTC)

Also, appreciate you helping me with my work on the little mountain! Looks like you're into the big stuff...although I have climbed Grand and Middle Teton in the Teton range in Wyoming...Grand is a little technical near the summit, but Middle is pretty much just a rock hop...as always the weather is the biggest problem...--MONGO 28 June 2005 08:00 (UTC)

Image tag change
Please do not change the image tag on Image:Leda emst.png. I was not able to obtain permission from the authors to use it under the terms of the GFDL, and we could be in really big trouble for claiming this. If you don't like its terms, put it up for deletion. And yes, I know the upload form has some short of checkbox - but that has no effect if I'm not the copyright holder. Deco 3 July 2005 23:12 (UTC)
 * I was tempted not to mark it GFDL but the wording seemed to indicate that they were in agreement with the GFDL license used on wikipedia. Normally, I would have used the tag but the wording swayed me otherwise. One must really be careful when writing the permission wording on the image description page. I will now put it up for deletion. RedWolf July 4, 2005 02:37 (UTC)

Image:Pcr.jpg
I query your tagging of this image.
 * When I made contact to obtain permission, I made it clear what the purpose was
 * The date was before May this year
 * The image has since been used in a UK commercial magazine (Birdwatching). The image was used without any acknowledgement, but appears not to have been taken directly from Wikipedia. There was no photographer credit, although when I contacted EMAP, the publishers, they assured me that this was an oversight since the normal practice is to do so.
 * If a commercial publication can use the image without credit or payment to the photographer, I cannot see how my use, having gone to the trouble of obtaining permission, can be invalid. Please retag more appropriately, jimfbleak 5 July 2005 05:11 (UTC)
 * When I simply see "permission" used on an image description page and without any further information about licensing, I use the tag. The licensing information implies that permission has only been granted for use on Wikipedia and not any other sites. Therefore, GFDL and the like licenses have not been applied to the image. I'm not responsible for the current wording of the  . If you wish the tag to be changed, I suggest that you contact the copyright owner again asking if they agree to license the image under GFDL or other like licenses. RedWolf July 5, 2005 05:27 (UTC)


 * Seems crazy to me that Birdwatching magazine can use the image without acknowledgement, seeking permission (at least directly) or payment, and yet you say we can't. I'm not going to jump through any more hoops on this though, so delete away. jimfbleak 6 July 2005 05:46 (UTC)

Help desk wikiproject
I have created a new Wikiproject which aims to bring computer veterans and people who need help with software tools they use on Wikipedia together. I'm writing this to you because I saw you on the bot list and wanted to know if you would be willing to help. There is already an open case: WikiProject help desk/20050702 Dmcdevit. The Windows tool that Dmcdevit uses to perform Transwikis has broken since the software upgrade. Triddle July 6, 2005 22:32 (UTC)

image tag Cc-by-2.0
RedWolf, My intention is to make everything I upload Cc-by-2.0, and I tagged the image you cited with that license. You are hereby authorized to tag any stray images I have uploaded in this way. Thank you, Ancheta Wis 7 July 2005 20:21 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for the info and I'll mark them as such when I come across them. RedWolf July 8, 2005 07:00 (UTC)

Indian peaks
Hi. Why do think it's necessary to create a subcategory of Category:Mountains of India for the mountains that are technically considered peaks? WikiProject Mountains has not decided to do this (what I would consider over-categorization) for any other country. RedWolf July 8, 2005 16:45 (UTC)


 * I thought it would separate the two, making it easier to identify the highest points in an Indian state from the hill ranges. I wasn't aware that the wikiproject had decided not to have the same. Is it so egregious? You can put it up for deletion if so. Regards. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  July 8, 2005 16:58 (UTC)

Image Tagging
Christ, how many times are we going to go through this? Australian images, particularly those of politicians, are a copyright minefield, and we're not sure whether we do or don't have a claim in about five different areas. We're all getting very sick of people with no interest in helping us solve this whacking a template on our user talk pages and expecting us to pull an answer out of our collective backsides. Ambi 8 July 2005 03:10 (UTC)
 * Well, if you had actually read the upload page when you uploaded the images and properly attributed the source and copyright information, you wouldn't be continually asked to resolve the issue. If you are going to take this stance, I will simply put them up for deletion when I now encounter them and you can make your stand on IFD if you wish them to be kept. RedWolf July 8, 2005 06:59 (UTC)

Iron Maiden
Hello RedWolf, I notice your screen name is similar to mine... But thats not why I'm here. Please see Talk:Iron Maiden and read my notes there. Thanks, Redwolf24 8 July 2005 04:13 (UTC)

Image:Peru-bol2.JPG
Hello there! That picture was one of my first contributions to Wikipedia, and I must said that at that point I didn't known too much about Copyrights. The picture is my own work, made it on Paint (I barely known how to use Photoshop :P ). I hope that this could solve that dispute. Messhermit 8 July 2005 15:49 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the information. I have now marked the image GFDL. RedWolf July 8, 2005 17:01 (UTC)

Michael Carter
Thanks for the supporting edits on Michael Carter. -Harmil 9 July 2005 17:32 (UTC)
 * Coincidental only edit to perform some cleanup task. Support should not be implied. RedWolf 07:28, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Oncidium-longipes.jpg
I've put the tag on the photo with explanation. JoJan 13:33, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Image:OldSkiPoles wb.jpg
Thanks for adding the GFDL notice--seems like I spend half my time on wikipedia asking users to please indicate what license they're releasing their photos under, and here's one of mine without it! Duh! Elf | Talk 05:10, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Untagged images report
Hi Redwolf, I noticed you got the untagged image report done. If you like I can generate a report similiar to the ones used on the double redirect project. All I need is the list. Might save you some time from having to split it up my hand. Triddle 18:55, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. I run OS X so I simply need to run "split" and its done. Thanks for the offer though. RedWolf 18:57, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Images on the Commons
Since this might be new to you, I want to let you know how it works. As you know, the Wikimedia Commons is a image sister project, mainly dumping PD and GDFL images there. If an image is used from there, a link will be given to the Commons. Here is an example: click on Image:Order_of_Canada_%28OC%29_ribbon_bar.png. This image is used here on Wikipedia, but if you click on it, it will tell you it is located on the Commons. It will give you some information on the image, but to get the full details, you have to click the link to the description page. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:50, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Oops, I think I confused you with User:Redwolf24. Sorry. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:52, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Yup, I think you have as I'm quite familiar with the use of Commons. RedWolf 04:58, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * I came here based on this post: Images_and_media_for_deletion. Sorry, again. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 05:01, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Image:Aegopodium podagraria1.jpg
This image and the two other mentioned on my talk page can be deleted. They were uploaded when non-commercial was still allowed. JoJan 08:06, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Move
Sorry about that, I was moving all the geographic places in KwaZulu-Natal to include the province designation. I didn't read that its a mountain. Feel free to move it back, sorry about that! Páll 04:29, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Cfd cleanup
Thanks for the null edit. &infin; Who ? &iquest; ? 03:10, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

user:Redwolf
Hi - Are you aware of user:Redwolf (note the lower case w)? This seems to be an account that was briefly used and abandoned in Jan 2003. If it was you, can you perhaps redirect the user page to yours? I ran into this on WP:LA, which had an entry for user:Redwolf (rather than user:RedWolf). I've fixed WP:LA, but it seems like a reasonably bad idea to have both accounts active (bad enough to have user:RedWolf and the recently made admin user:Redwolf24). -- Rick Block (talk) 02:21, July 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi. No, I wasn't aware there was a user by that name with the lowercase w. That account is not mine. If they ever come back, it could definitely cause some confusion although given the long absence it's highly unlikely. I was aware of Redwolf24 but hopefully that shouldn't be as potentially confusing (although one user has already been tripped up by it - see above). RedWolf 04:05, July 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * It was an honest mistake. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 06:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * No problem. RedWolf 08:24, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

July 1 IFD
I answered some of your concerns on the IFD page. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 06:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

activity over at WikiProject Mountains
Lots of discussion at WikiProject Mountains/General: what to do about the UK hill infoboxes, and this spills over to needing a "norange" template (like you proposed a while ago). I think I'm heavily outvoted for creating a norange template, so I'll go ahead and make one. There is also pushback on the color scheme, perhaps you can chime in. Thanks!

--- hike395 16:40, July 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm stuck trying to convert the UK hill infoboxes, and may need help from CanisRufus. Are you interested? Read more at WikiProject Mountains/General. Thanks!!!! -- hike395 02:32, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Peche Melba image
Hi RedWorld. The image was found on this website. At the time, I wasn't yet aware of image tags and fair use. Ottens 8 July 2005 10:21 (UTC)
 * Hi. That image is not public domain so is a copyright violation and I have tagged it as such and replied on your talk page. If you feel it qualifies under fair use, please state your reasons on Copyright problems and if the image survives, also on its description page. Thanks. RedWolf 16:19, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Lincoln Cathedral Image Tag
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure how to tag it. Could you tag it under "all rights reserved" for me? Cheers,

User:Differentgravy

Added rights on image
Hello there, I just added GFDL license status to my pictures Vagnharad regn.JPG and PenguinsBouldersBeachSouthAfrica.jpg. As I'm rather fresh on submitting my photos, please tell me if there is anything more I should do to license them correctly.

Cheers

PicoMedia 15:53, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have replied on your talk page. RedWolf 15:59, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Katse Dam/Temp
I re-wrote this article as instructed on the notice, but nothing happened. Did I do something wrong. Looks like you deleted the article?
 * I sometimes process dozens of copyvios at a time and usually when someone rewrites the article, they put a comment on the article's talk page. There wasn't one in this case so I missed the temp page rewrite. I have now moved the temp page to the main article. Also, please remember to sign your posts. RedWolf 15:48, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Duh! I see, on the copyright violation it says leave a note on the talk page. Sorry, and thanks!

Lincoln University image
This is my own image, I took it and developed it myself as part of my GCSE Photography coursework. --Differentgravy 19:09, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I have tagged it as GFDL. RedWolf 22:36, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Location of Pictures
Hello there RedWolf, I am fairly new to this website, I don't know how to put the license or the source of where I got the pictures from. I got the picture of Teri Hatcher and James Denton from [] and the one of Teri Hatcher on Good Morning America was sent to me by one of my friends, I don't recall where she got it from. Sorry. Thanks if you can help putting up the information. BlueStar. :)

Uploading an Image
Hi, I am new (Angel21, my link does not shown up) and I wanted to know how to upload an image for the Stephen Dorff article. Also, if you can also tell me how to license an image I would appreciate it. I have some pictures that are on my computer, but some I do not know where I got them from a lot of them were scaned from a magazine and I do not know. Please help me to place a picture of him on his article.-[]

New Untagged Images
There are ~5700 new untagged images at Untagged Images/23jun2005. Can you help tag and spread the word to others. --Thanks Nv8200p 19:31, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. I'm aware of this new set. I'm a little "tagged out" at the moment so I'm laying off helping out for a few more weeks to "recover". I'll be back to help. RedWolf 08:20, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Uploaded a Stephen Dorff Image
Hi. Thank you for the information. I found a picture Image:SDorff018.jpg. I copyrighted as "This is a screenshot of a copyrighted movie or television program. It is believed that screenshots may be exhibited on Wikipedia under the fair use provision of United States copyright law." If I did anything wrong, please feel free to delete. But if it is correct is it possible for you to size the picture to thumbnail size. I got the picture a couple months ago from [], and I did some editing to it by cutting it down some. I did not know how to put that info in. I tried editing the page and putting it below the copyright. If you could help me make the right corrections I would appreciate it. - [](Angel21 still shows up as not having an article, when underlined.)
 * Hi. I have thumbed the image and added the appropriate copyright tag to the image description page. BTW, the article reads more like a fan page than an encyclopedia article so you may want to consider reformatting it so it's more in line with the later style. RedWolf 08:16, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your help with the Stephen Dorff article. I made changes to the article to fit the encyclopedia format. Feel free to check it out and let me know what should be removed or fixed. Thank you so much. -Angel21[]

Felt like dropping by!
Hello my fellow Canis Rufus. My good friend Jwrosenzweig tells me to drop you a note. I vaguely remember dropping one on your bot's page. I've seen you around many many times so just thought I'd get acquainted with another Redwolf ;-) even if he's never heard of me. Happy editing Redwolf24 23:10, 5 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh that's right, I left you a barnstar a while ago. Redwolf24 23:12, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Template:Mtnbox
The infobox really shouldn't use html tables, and there's a lot of non-compliant code in there. It is also standard to use the class="toccolours" on infobox tempaltes. I have noted this on the discussion page you pointed me to. ed g2s &bull;  talk  18:10, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * What exactly is "broken"? And by all means make an RfC. ed g2s  &bull;  talk  14:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi RedWolf, it's true that toccolours is standard, however their is also an infobox class. You can override the colours using style tags. It's best we have a standard style for infoboxes though... - Ta bu shi da yu 23:43, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Requested move
Hello. Can you go here and express your opinion about requested move of one Indonesian volcano (Mount Kerinci)? Your opinion will be appreciated. -- Darwinek 10:50, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Please see my comments on WikiProject_Mountains/General
I hope this will at least resolve part of the dispute. JesseW 05:19, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Infobox standardization discussion
User:Ed g2s has started a global discussion about standardizing all infoboxes, at Infobox standardisation. You may wish to contribute to the discussion. -- hike395 06:20, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Mountains_by_Elevation_(km)
I have responded to your comments on User_talk:NevilleDNZ. ¢ NevilleDNZ 17:13, 3 September 2005 (UTC) ¢

Maybe you will be interested to vote on the CFD for that "Oceanic trenches by depth (km)" category. Just go here. - Darwinek 12:50, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Marvel Universe
Sorry about bothering you, but I'd like to know why the Marvel Universe Characters category has been erased and I can't find the discussion page as to the matter... could you please clear the matter up for me? Cheers, Zeppocity 09:17, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Didn't see this until now as it was originally on my user page where it doesn't belong. See Categories for deletion/Log/2005 August 25. RedWolf 01:38, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

mathematician vs. Arab mathematician
What is the convention in category listings? My thought was that it would be useful to list all nested categories, but maybe that happens automatically. Please let me know, for future reference, if there is a reason not to list Arab mathematician, mathematician, and biography all three under Category. Rick Norwood 13:59, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The convention is that if an article is placed in a sub-category, it does not generally belong in a parent category. Thus, why I removed the article I suspect you have in mind from Mathematicians as it was already in Arab mahematicians. The Biography category was simply being deleted. RedWolf 22:27, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Fremont Peak.JPG
Hi. Did you take this photo? The photo is not currently licensed and if you took the photo I can place it under GFDL. Thanks. RedWolf 03:40, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Sure did. GFDL-it. Ecryder 04:17, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

The Yearling
Hi there Redwolf. I think we need to do a tiny bit of disambiguation work on this article, and since you have contributed to it and appear to be currently active I thought I would ask you this.

We need to create a disambiguation the page from Jean Smart's filmography, to go to The Yearling (1994 movie), and we need to move The Yearling to The Yearling (1946 movie). I've made the disambiguation to the former on Smart's biography for now, but, would this be correct? Feedback appreciated. Thank you. Bobo192 | Edits 18:20, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. What you have suggested is probably the way to go if disambiguation is really needed. Is the 1994 film a lot different than the 1946 film in terms of what happens? If not, a case could be made to just have one article for the films. I noticed on the talk page that someone has volunteered to write an article on the novel. I've seen some articles where the novel and the films based on it are still in one article. I guess it just depends on how long the article gets before it makes more sense to have separate articles. RedWolf 02:33, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Night Of The Proms - purged....
Night Of The Proms

Ermmm...what has happened here? I just wanted to look this up, but only found 6 deleted edits. Could you please tell me what is the problem here? Yes, Mghamburg has violated the copyright, but what about the 5 previous edits? All the history text is now gone as well - why? Was this probably a rip from another web site? -andy 80.129.96.40 08:02, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Mghamburg did not violate the copyright, they tagged it as a copyright violation. It was deleted as such after at least 7 days on WP:CP without a rewrite being completed. RedWolf 01:57, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Re:Image deletion
Hi RedWolf - not entirely clear about your message re: Ruapehu.jpg. If you mean it's just been moved to Commons so isn't needed in Wikipedia itself, though, that's fine (as long as the article links are changed, of course). Grutness...  wha?  01:35, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The image has the same name on Commons so when it's deleted here it will automatically pick up the version from Commons. RedWolf 01:39, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
 * OK thanks - I've never been 100% sure how transference of things to commons works. Grutness...  wha?  11:09, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Volcanoes of Alaska
Hi RedWolf- I don't know much about editing Wikipedia, but I do know plenty about Alaska volcanoes. (I'm the db creator/info compiler for the Alaska Volcano Observatory.) I'd like to put the more improved information up (with citations!), but the learning curve here seems kinda steep. I assume you or someone else will tell me if I flub it up, but I'm apologizing in advance. Also, some of the Alaska volcano names are either wrong or not those commonly accepted by the Smithsonian and by AVO. Can/should I change these names? Thank you. Idocrase 19:04, 19 September 2005 (UTC) -- Thanks for getting back to me. I'll start slow and small and see how it goes. I'm aware of copyright issues - had to work through all of them to put the AVO site together. Idocrase 17:54, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Image:GraingerEngineeringLibrary.jpg
Could I trouble you to undelete this image for a moment so I can take a look at it, I believe the image may have been one of mine which G3Pro uploaded, if so, I'll upload it again and properly attribute it (all my photographs are GFDL). Agriculture 00:42, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, while deleted articles can be restored, images cannot, only their description pages (which I have done although I'm not sure it will be of much use). No harm in re-uploading the image if you own it and believe it's useful for an article. RedWolf 01:01, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah :( Didn't realize that, we'll I've uploaded mine anyway. Agriculture 01:23, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Image deletions
Please restore the tags I put on the images. You are putting tags on images that I took and re-uploaded, such as Astate.jpg, and you are changing tags of images that are covered under fairuse guidelines. The Wikipedia gyuidelines for using images of fairuse are very clearly specified. They do not need a "rationale" as long as they comply with what is clearly termed here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fair_use#Images

Thanx. These images were wrongly marked by Roozbeh in the first place. --Zereshk 04:46, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I disagree with your fair use claims as I do not feel that the "blanket fair use" claim applies in the case of the images you have uploaded. You have uploaded many images from web sites where you have slapped GFDL or PD on them simply because you copied them to Wikipedia. Only when you were confronted did you resort to using fair use. I also do not understand when you first say "you took them" and yet you are applying fair use to them? If you took the photos yourself, then you are the copyright owner and can release them under a free license. Please do not say "I took them" if you simply copied them from another website and uploaded them here. Two other people will need to agree that these images are fair use, otherwise they will be deleted according to PUI policy. Please state your case on PUI rather than replying here. RedWolf 06:34, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Hello RedWolf.


 * The reason some images were PD and GFDL and later changed to Fairuse was because at first, I didnt really care about the proper tagging as I had (have) reason to claim that images from Iranian government websites do not fall under the protection of United States or International copyright laws as stated here. (I can provide you with further evidence of this). I only started paying attention to the proper tagging after people started deleting the images, and after Wikipedia decided to take its image policies a bit more seriously.
 * I'm sorry I wasnt clear in stating whether I supplied the image (uploading), or took them (photograph). Whenever I say "provide", it could mean both. I have been clarifying this recently whenever I deal with images anywhere.
 * I dont think deciding whether an image is fairuse or not is up to vote. If it was, Wikipedia wouldnt clearly specify what it considers as "fairuse". Aside from that, ICHO is a government affiliated organization that I have worked for, and they do not make profit for their images. Their images are a publicity tool used to uplift the image of Iran inorder to draw foreign popular interest and investment. ICHO does in fact have a branch that deals with profiting from posters and postcards, etc. But I didnt post anything from them, since fairuse would not apply to them.


 * Thanx. Regards.--Zereshk 23:21, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Image deletion
Why was the Jerseys-Are-TIGHT photo (which was being used on the 2 Live Stews page) deleted? There weren't any copyright issues surrounding it. It was a photo that I personally took so what was the purpose of deleting it? Explain that to me.
 * First of all, you will have to give me exact images names as I have no idea exactly which ones you are referring to. Secondly, who are you? RedWolf 01:18, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Response
Hi RedWolf. I guess I should first ask how to you respond to a comment on your talk page? I'm so clueless it's not even funny! Anyways, I will attempt to upload 5390 onto WikiCommons and will most definately do that in the future. Thanks for classifying Saint Lazaria for me. I loaded it up to the its site so it should be good now. I'll put some more time into researching copyright classifications for photos so I don't have to burden others when I can't figure it out in the future. Thanks for the help! Jarfingle 07:46, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeats image
I have had to relist Image:WBYeats1908.jpg on stuff for deletion becuase you tagged it as disputed when you cleaned up. There cannot be any dispute in this case. The source it was from says that the photographer (the copyright holder) died in 1966, and says who he was. This is not therefore out of copyright in any country. Please just delete it. (I know these decisions are difficult sometimes, and being lenient is good, but there is no possible justification here). Justinc 01:27, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

No source images
How do you find images without a source so fast? I have been doing it too but at a much slower rate than you. Any help would be great! Swollib 03:11, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * See Untagged images. RedWolf 03:12, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Re: removing references to images as well as deleting them
Please see User_talk:Lupo for my full response. JesseW, the juggling janitor 00:53, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

So I see you joined the Dark Side
What next, images of goats?! Another equally lengthy diatribe by yours truly here. P.S. Grr. El_C 10:23, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't get me wrong, though, I love the Image use policy (i.e. don't let it know of my above complaint!) El_C 10:32, 28 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I really don't understand what you mean by joining the dark side. RedWolf 00:29, 29 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh, shiii, I realize now that I mistook you for User:Redwolf24, gah! Sorry 'bout that. El_C 03:57, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Image:Rail tracks 350.jpg
You tagged this image as unverified despite the fact it was said to come from the Dutch Wikipedia. Now, I don't expect you to know Dutch and find the Dutch article on rail tracks to check, but I would like it if you checked such claims in the future, either by asking a Dutch Wikipedian here or going to their village pump. The image in question was free to use, so there was no reason to delete it. - Mgm|(talk) 22:13, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The image was not linked to an article at the time so I had no easy way to find it on the dutch wikipedia. I did not tag it for deletion. At the time I tagged it the template made no mention of it being deleted within 7 days as it does now. RedWolf 00:26, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Image:Vitus Bering.jpg
You were right, the Russian version of Vitus Bering's image was apparently missing a licence and Wulfson actually didn't upload the file, but asked for the licence. I replaced the "commons" image with the English one with PD licence. I hope it solves the problem. Thanks for your attention! -Modulo 217.193.133.50 13:31, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Visual Basic Classic Wikibook
I see you have contributed to the Visual Basic article on Wikipedia. Any chance you would like to join in editing the wikibook: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Visual_Basic_Classic? --Kjwhitefoot 09:29, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I might have edited it while doing a maintenance task. Other than that, I don't use VB. RedWolf 16:49, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Who's RfA
Thank you for supporting my masters RfA. He appreciates your support and comments and looks forward to better serving Wikipedia the best he can. Of course I will be doing all of the real work. He would have responded to you directly, but he is currently out of town, and wanted to thank you asap. Thanks again. --Who's mop?&iquest;? 21:05, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Image deletion
Why did you delete the very valuable pictures on Kunduz, Zahir Shah, and Gholam Serwar Nasher?!
 * Which images in particular are you referring to? Probably because they had no source and/or copyright information which is now required on all images. Secondly, who are you? RedWolf 00:30, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I am referring to the only pictures which were on the sites Kunduz, Zahir Shah, and Gholam Serwar Nasher. What information do they need? Steve 23:00, 8 October 2005
 * Go to the upload page. Make sure you read and understand everything on that page with regards to source and copyright information. Images on the site more than 7 days w/o this information are subject to immediate deletion. RedWolf 23:18, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

They are subject to immediate deletion says who? Steve, 19:18, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * See Criteria for speedy deletion. RedWolf 17:37, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Protected areas
You may wish to join us at the WikiProject Protected areas. Your feedback would be valuable and since there are a thousand redlined articles yet top be written, there's a lot to do for everyone. We've been discussing changes to infoboxes in the WikiProject Protected areas talk page and also for reference, link through the project page to general and the "status" pages too. I recognize you may have a full plate, but don't hesitate to join in if you want.--MONGO 05:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar
We've never spoken before, but Ive seen some of your work and I believe that you deserve this. →Jo urna list  >>talk<<  04:28, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Re: Diran Pics (to add to WikiCommons)
Hi Thanks for the message, I didn't know that the upload link given on the help page is different from Wiki Commons. I have read about wiki commons, I'll message MacGyverMagic about it and then mail him/her the pictures. If I understand correctly, that is the only way to add stuff to wiki commons, right? Waqas.usman 06:33, 10 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi. All you need to do is go to Commons and register. Then you can upload images like you do on the English wiki site. RedWolf 00:31, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Pune
Thank you for your contribution at Pune. Please keep it up!!! - P R A D E E P Somani (talk)
 * I don't recall. Probably just a dab. RedWolf 02:54, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

User Categorisation
You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Canada page as living in or being associated with Canada. As part of the User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians somewhere undetermined in Canada for instructions.--Rmky87 01:56, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of bio of James Ford, Roshi
Why did you delete the bio for Rev. James Ishmael Ford, Roshi? Ford is a key person not only in the confluence of Buddhism with Unitarian Universalism, but also one of the few Zen Masters in New England.
 * Probably copyvio but I can't recall. Provide the exact article name. Who are you? RedWolf 02:21, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Link is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/James_Ishmael_Ford. I am one of his students.


 * It was a copyright violation. RedWolf 00:45, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

I see. That text was from one of our websites. You are hereby granted permission to copy that into Wikipedia. Let me know what further proof of this permission you would like.

Okay, I wrote something new. --Teishin 15:35, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging
Just wanted to thank you for your continually dedicated image tagging. Superm401 | Talk 02:22, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Articles which lack sources name change
I saw that you proposed to change the name of Articles which lack sources to "Articles that lack sources". Should these also be renamed?


 * Articles which may be inaccurate
 * Articles which may be unencyclopedic
 * Articles which may contain original research

-- Kjkolb 12:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)


 * It's not what I proposed. It is the result of the CFD discussion/vote on the renaming of that category and the name chosen was "Articles lacking sources". I saw the other like named categories but not sure at this point if they should be similarly renamed. RedWolf 15:22, 14 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Just to make sure, I was actually asking, not being sarcastic. -- Kjkolb 08:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

tags
Hi. I'm finding a bunch of images that you've tagged that are clearly dated prior to 1923 (well, or not so clearly-- a bunch of bird illustrations just said "old encyclopedia" but I figured out which encyclopedia, and they're all pre-1923). For the record, images published prior to 1923 can be tagged PD-US. And of course, 200-year-old paintings can safely be tagged PD-old.

The ones I'm looking at mostly seem to have been tagged last January, so you may have figured this out already, but I thought I'd mention it just in case. TIA, Mwanner | Talk 23:50, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi. I think I have an idea of some of the images you are referring to. I wasn't sure what was meant by "old" so I erred on the side of caution. AFAIK, photos taken today of 200 year old paintings don't get PD status as they are owned by the photographer and their copyright starts at the time the photo is taken. RedWolf 02:17, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I hadn't thought of it that way, but it's a horrifying idea, if true. That would seem to imply that simply scanning a PD image would grant the person who performs the scan a copyright, which seems to me only slightly more ridiculous than the idea that I could copyright an image of someone else's painting by simply photographing it.  Any idea where to get a definitive answer? -- Mwanner | Talk 15:53, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, this line of reasoning seems to get even worse. If I find an image of a photograph that was originally published before 1923 that has been republished in a book printed last year, it would seem from what you're saying, that I can't scan and use that image without a GFDL or equivalent release from the publisher.  If that is the case, I suspect that the vast majority of PD-tagged images on WP are suspect.  The only exemptions would be images actually created by the uploader from original PD sources by scanning or photography or taken from those (very rare) sites that specify that the contents are PD or equivalent.  It's really ugly, though I have a sinking feeling that you may be right. -- Mwanner | Talk 16:55, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * From the Copyrights article: "Note that copyright law governs the creative expression of ideas". IAcertainlyNAL, but it seems to me a stretch to call the act of photographing a painting an act of creative expression.
 * From Public domain-- "In the past, in some jurisdictions such as the USA, a work would enter the public domain with respect to copyright if it was released without a copyright notice. This is no longer the case. Any work (of certain, enumerated types) receives copyright as soon as it is fixed in a tangible medium." It would seem to be important to know when this changed.  If a work was released during the period when copyright notice was required, and it did not have such notice, it would seem reasonable to assume that it has remained in the public domain.
 * Ah ha! From the same article: "It is well-settled that work in the public domain keeps that status, even after being embedded in a copyrighted work." (See "Privity problems" section). This would seem to suggest that a photo of a PD image would still be PD.
 * Note, too, that Image_use_policy does not say anything about modern photographs of old images, so either it is deficient, or your reading above is wrong.
 * Sorry about spewing all this stuff at you-- you are the editor I see working in this area the most. The subject concerns me pretty deeply-- I work on a lot of history articles, and I have uploaded a lot of images created before 1923 but found on web pages, and I have tagged them all PD on the basis of their publication date alone.  If you can't answer these issues, do you know where I should take these concerns? -- TIA, Mwanner | Talk 17:58, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm certainly no copyright expert and I don't have a simple answer to your concerns. You might want to look at Copyright FAQ (and talk page). If you find a definitive answer, let me know. I think taking a photograph of something, public domain or not, gives the photographer full copyright protection on that photo and they can assign a license as they see fit. RedWolf 18:14, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Good source. From Copyright_FAQ
 * Taking a work in the public domain and modifying it in a significant way creates a new copyright on the work.
 * [...]
 * However, the new work must be different from the original in order for a new copyright to apply, as the court ruled in Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corporation.
 * The Bridgeman Art Library had made photographic reproductions of famous works of art from museums around the world (works already in the public domain.) The Corel Corporation used those reproductions for an educational CD-ROM without paying Bridgeman.  Bridgeman claimed copyright infringement. The Court ruled that reproductions of images in the public domain are not protected by copyright if the reproductions are slavish or lacking in originality. In their opinion, the Court noted: "There is little doubt that many photographs, probably the overwhelming majority, reflect at least the modest amount of originality required for copyright protection.... But 'slavish copying', although doubtless requiring technical skill and effort, does not qualify."
 * Unless I'm misreading this, that seems to wrap it up. Do you see it any other way? -- Mwanner | Talk 18:36, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Hmm, what about Image:Mona-lisa-through-glass.jpg which is a photo of the Mona Lisa painting? The photographer claims GFDL. Why would this not be PD or stop someone from claiming PD? Or would the fact that there is a reflection on the glass enclosure is enough for a derivative work? What if it had simply been a photo of the painting without the enclosure? If I (or anyone else) were to go to the Louvre and somehow manage to take a photo of the painting without being in it's enclosure (similar to what the Louvre has done for the source of the photo being used on Wikipedia), is that photo PD immediately or only after 70 years? RedWolf 21:42, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Seems straightforward to me. In Image:Mona-lisa-through-glass.jpg, the PD image is less than 25% of the area of the image-- the photographer has certainly created a new image that incorporates the PD image, so a new copyright is created. But 'slavish copying', although doubtless requiring technical skill and effort, does not qualify" to create a newly copyrighted work-- the PD status of the original image then applies to the photograph.


 * Sure, there could be grey areas-- that's what courts are there for. But most of the images we're talking about on Wikipedia, say Image:Asher Durand Kindred Spirits.jpg e.g., would be a slavish copy of the original PD work, and thus PD itself.
 * Shouldn't this be using the PD-Art tag and not simply PD? RedWolf 22:24, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, that's another kettle of fish. Yes, paintings by Durand should be PD-art, because he died before 1905.  But in one of those areas I'm not quite clear on-- suppose he died in 1940, but the painting was published in 1922.  I assume PD-US could then be used. Or PD-old-50. If you have any light to shed on why these different tags exist, please point the way...


 * I just changed the tag on Kindred Spirits, and was amused to see that the expansion of the tag includes the phrase This photograph of the work [emphasis added] is also in the public domain in the United States (see Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.). -- TIA, Mwanner | Talk 23:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Better still, scanned photographs would seem to be the ultimate in slavish copies, so if the original is PD, so will be the scan. -- Mwanner | Talk 22:13, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

your bot and removing Category:Ontario academics
was this a speedy delete by your bot? there s NO record of a discussion on the decision to remove this cat on WP:CFD. there s legitimate reasons for having this cat based on the condition of other cats it is a sub-cat of and which are sub-cats of it, in particularly that Category:Canadian academics is nearly completely sub-cated into the various fields of academia and/or professorships according to the feilds they are in. moreover, Category:People from Ontario was sub-cated according to broad occupation. where s the consistency in removing this and not Category:Ontario actors, Category:Ontario artists, etc. -Mayumashu 03:19, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Categories for deletion/Log/2005 October 7 RedWolf 03:21, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * thanks

O'Connell Street image status is changed
Thanks :)

Deletion of image in Celes Chère
The image there comes from the same sources as the other Final Fantasy VI characters. Even if not, anyone can make an exact copy of the same image by screen capturing the actual game, either on emulator or legally with a SNES. Also, the in-game icon is actually a zoomed-in and color-reduced version of Yoshitaka Amano's drawing on the left. -- Myria 02:40, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Why didn't you put this info on the image description page? This is exactly why images like this get deleted because of the total lack of information on their source and copyright status. Don't assume that people validating image source/copyright info know anything about the subject matter. RedWolf 03:17, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Because I didn't put the picture there. I have no idea what the exact source of the image is.  It could have come from either Square's web site or from an emulator. -- Myria 04:19, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

RE: Image:MountLogan.jpg
Hi! I hope you're well, and thanks for your note. Sorry about not including source information for this pic: I did not take it and obtained it (legitimately, methinks) off of a mountain website. I did so because it seemed apt for the geography section in the Canada article (being its highest mountain) and because the prior pic was both unlicensed and ... rather plain (of Arctic rocks).

As well, I upload some images and create others (past and prior), and have sometimes neglected including the license blurb. Forgive me! In the next week, I have every intention of revisiting all images I've uploaded/created and appending them with proper summaries/licenses. I hope this is OK. Thoughts? Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony 02:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note; forgive my delay in addressing this. Hmmm.  I've uploaded another picture in its place (with credit), found by doing a Google search, and hope that the license and description for it are sufficient.  If not, the only other option is to include yet another image found on a Canadian government website of lower quality.  Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony 07:12, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

RE: Image Uploads
Greetings, Since I am new to editing at Wikipedia I hope I am doing this right. I appologize for how I originally inserted the images, I now now how to do it correctly and will not overight copyrighted images again. I recieved your message and was curious what I didn't do. After the first few images I started giving the credit to the fan sites where I go the images from right away. Does that not comply with the rules here? I am not trying to be a smart alec I just want to add to this amazing site and just want to make sure I"m not breaking any rules. -- Dstorres

Mt. Harvard
Hey, I saw you that you contributed to the Mt. Harvard page. I just visited it, and at some point someone messed with the coordinates link, and I can't figure out how to change it, and I don't know where to report it on the vandalism page. Do you know how to fix it?
 * Looks fine to me. Someone just recently changed it. Remember to sign your posts. RedWolf 19:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Category:Unfair games
Hi, I noticed you closed the cfd on this category (Categories_for_deletion/Unfair_games) in February as "Consensus was to delete". Is there some reason why it hasn't been deleted? —Blotwell 03:33, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. Can't recall exactly why it wasn't deleted -- I probably just forgot to actually delete it after I had logged it. RedWolf 05:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Images
Hi Redwolf, I'm still in the process of contacting the owners to ask if they'll release them under a free licence. It's quite a big job to track them down. However, the ones listed are all being properly used as fair use; and some are in fact public domain. They shouldn't really have been listed in the first place. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:03, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I have cleared the images from WP:CP. Discussion has been placed on the relevant talk pages for the images. Rationale needs to provided for fair use images where it has not yet been provided or they may face future CP claims. If they get unlinked from their current articles, they might get deleted on site as unused fair use. RedWolf 04:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Reversion of Mount Garibaldi entry
I already put this on Garibaldi's "talk" page, but this a second advisory that the [revert] that was done on my changes to Garibaldi have restated the original error I sought to correct. To whit: Mount Garibaldi is NOT part of the Cascade Range. It is part of the Cascade Volcanoes GROUP but it is NOT, repeat NOT, part of the Cascade Range; it is a part of the Coast Mountains, which contrary to previous errors on the Cascade Range page are NOT part of the Cascade Range. Skookum1 02:12, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Revert
I suggested this, but is there a way to revert ALL edits by a user and/or all edits from time "A" to time "B"?

I am reverting one at a time.

WikiDon 04:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Umm, what??? RedWolf 04:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Arthur lichte
The article about Arthur Lichte was from a US Air Force Site and was public domain as a work of the US federal goverment. It was reproduced on the site of the air and space convention but was originally from the USAF site and is a work of the federal goverment. Please undelete it or give me the OK to reconstruct it.
 * The talk page should have provided the exact URL so it can be verified. Place your request on Deletion review if you want it to be undeleted. RedWolf 01:14, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Walter Hampson
I must admit to being somewhat annoyed at your deletion of a article I placed about My Great great Uncle Walter Hampson. Author and dialect poet 1864-1932. The reason you gave of infringing copyright is incorrect. As I also wrote and created the web site http://hometown.aol.co.uk/honomeround/walterhampson.html I think I can give myself permission to copy my own words? Is it possible for you to reinstate this article without me having to rewrite it?
 * Who are you? Unless a website explicitly states that the text on the site is in the public domain or is GFDL compatible, putting the text verbatim from such a website into a Wikipedia article is a copyright violation. A copyvio notice was on the article for at least 7 days but no one offered to rewrite nor was there a claim of permission on the talk page. Wikipedia has no idea that you were the one who originally wrote the text and even then, without an explicit granting of public domain or GFDL, any article containing such text will be deleted. RedWolf 01:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

13th Nov. I am not the most competent HTML writer. So I do not want to mess with my original site that the article was copied from. And I don't know what GFDL means. So if I rewrite the article in a different form, will that be allowed?


 * GFDL is the GNU Free Documentation License. Essentially, anything released under GFDL can be used and modified by others as long as they follow the GFDL rules. You are more than welcome to rewrite the article. Just keep in mind that whatever you post can be modified and reused as other contributers or users see fit (as long as it's in line with GFDL). If you subsequently post your rewrite on your web site, you will have to put a notice on your website that the rewrite comes from Wikipedia. Finally, please end your comments with four tildes so your id and date can be recorded. RedWolf 02:43, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Villy on Veals!
Please block this user? User:Villy on Veals!. I told another guy to, but guess he's not online. BDArambson or something like that. Check my history. --216.191.200.1 17:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Deletion: "Christina Yu"
You deleted the article "Christina Yu" on the 10th of November. May I ask what exactly was assumed to be a potential IP liability for Wikipedia here? Unfortunately I seem to have missed the discussion about this article, as I hadn't logged in to wikipedia for 3 weeks. There shouldn't be any intellectual property problems with this article. I was the original author of the article. Although I had borrowed some snippets from other sources, I had sought explicit permission from the involved intellectual property owner to publish the article as it was on Wikipeda under GNU Free Documentation License. I thought I had stated this clearly on the deleted articles' talk page; maybe I didn't though (I wouldn't be able see it now anymore anyway). I have previously pointed out intellectual property right infringements on wikipedia - and I would not bother to write an article containing IP infringements. At least, this is what I think - let me know if I am wrong. Is it possible to undelete this article? Thanks in advance for your advice. ReidarM 15:35, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Your comments on the talk page indicated that the information had been "cleared" but this was not convincing to at least two other editors, nor to myself. An email originating from the IP owner is usually the best way to back up permission claims. You can either rewrite the article or make a request on Deletion review. RedWolf 16:24, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick answer! Seems like I am presumed guilty and would have to prove that I am innocent (wouldn't it be nice if people could trust each other...) - Anyway, as soon as I've got time I'll list the article for undeletion along with the email from the IP owner to "back up my claim" ;-) (Interesting to note that an email would suffice though. If I provide the email, this is essentially nothing more than another claim. After all, "forging" an email including headers wouldn't  take more time than writing this sentence). ReidarM 23:53, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: WP:CP process
"&hellip; please ensure that you blank the articles as per the instructions." I am sorry, I obviously did not read the instructions carefully; they state clearly that in such cases I should blank the article. Will try harder in the future :-). -- IslandGyrl 23:04, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Howdy
It doesn't really matter, but I tend to use American English when dealing with articles on American topics and British English elsewhere...I see that you altered the spelling for meters here but I won't revert it over a petty issue but just wanted to let you know how I approach the issue involving spelling issues.--MONGO 05:10, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, American's just don't know how to spell! :) Seriously though, perhaps we should simply agree to use "m" for topics about the United States. RedWolf 02:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Mtnbox templates
Feel free to revert them -- if tidy is still turned off on the servers, the reverted version will still be broken. If tidy is running again, they will work.

The reason I made the change is that Wikimedia devs had to turn off HTML tidy on all the servers. This had consequences for templates with unmatched tags. In the case of the mountain box templates, what happened is the pages were served with the closing table tag at the end of the first template. The subsequent templates were displayed on the page as raw HTML (that is, all with tag delimiters all escaped to &amp;gt; and &amp;lt; in the source, so the HTML code was what appeared when the page was rendered. So each mountain page displayed 10 to 30 lines of HTML source at the top, and only the start template of each set was displayed as a table.

I think tidy may have been re-enabled now, but as of yesterday, the developers said it was off indefinitely and we should take steps necessary to run without it.

Like I said, feel free to revert it. --Tabor 14:04, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


 * P.S. I asked the developers how, ideally, this problem should be avoided in the first place. They told me the templates should use optional parameters instead of splitting into multiple parts with opening and closing tags in separate templates. --Tabor 14:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


 * When did optional parameters get implemented? I had requested this quite a while back as the better solution but the powers that be decided they didn't want to make templates feel more like "programming". Where are these new features documented? RedWolf 00:53, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


 * It looks like the photo was fixed without reverting. I had missed a newline. --Tabor 14:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

if
The problem is the   stuff in the if. You could either do like I fixed it, which leaves some extra space if it's not there (though that could be cut down by removing cellspacing/padding), or use nested templates like infobox rail. --SPUI (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't want a new table row if the parameter is not provided or empty so the workaround you provided doesn't work the way I would like. Thanks for the help though. Don't want to change the cellpadding/cellspacing as that wouldn't make the overall table look "right". Don't really want to do the "call template" approach but may have to. Really, the developers should provide a proper if-else conditional for templates. Sigh. RedWolf 07:43, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

question
Can you briefly explain why the article "Japanese Journal of Religious Studies" was deleted on 4 November 2005, please? Thank you very much. Thank you for your reply. I have another question, but maybe we can continue this exchange on my discussion page so I don't clog up yours. If you have time, I would appreciate further discussion about this issue. Thank you very much! Jb05-crd 02:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC) Thank you very much for all of your help, explanations, and suggestions. Jb05-crd 04:58, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Copyright violation. Please sign your posts (apparently by an anon IP). RedWolf 04:19, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Hello again. Thank you for your explanation.  I left a response on my discussion page.  Thank you. Jb05-crd 20:39, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Military images
Per our discussion some time ago regarding a user claiming copyright on several military badges and medals, I believe the user returned under the anon ip of 165.189.41.11 and proceeded to add copyright tags to every one of the images and the articles in which they appeared. I reverted all of this and am prepared to state exactly where each and every image came from. Also, the root of this is that no one private citizen can claim a copyright on a United States badge or medal. It would be like drawing a picture of a Colonel's eagle and then stating that you hold the copyright on the insignia. Anyway, I did investgiate this and the images do match the website that the original user stated. The user pretty much has a website full of insignia, medals, and badges pictures which also appear in several U.S. publications through such organizations as Randolph Air Force Base and the Institute of Heraldry (to name but two). This situation will probably not go away, as the user in question is determined to state copyright ownership of these images. Just wanted to let you know where this stood. Thanks for your support. -Husnock 23:08, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia Status - OpenFacts
I noticed you recently comment on the OpenFact's Wikipedia Status page. I would like to solicit comments on WikiStatus/CoLocus (still don't know what to name it), an alternative to the OpenFacts page. I think it is a lot easier to use (not surprisingly), but I'd like input. Thanks. &mdash; Ambush Commander (Talk) 03:23, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Canadian Rockies
I think that many of the Canadian Rockies-related articles severely lack in quality and substance. Categorizing helps inventory what's there, and can be further subcategorized into mountains, lakes, or whatever. Or, sort the mountains by park. Stub-sorting can be done, prioritize, and I can help out with improving the articles, create maps, add/organize photos, etc. Right now, there is nothing that groups these articles together. ---Aude 06:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I'll leave the mountain articles, as is, and work on other park-related articles. The mountain articles look good and consistent, with the templates.  However, the main park articles (e.g. Jasper National Park) need more about their history, geography, ecology, tourist info, etc, as has been done for US parks like Glacier National Park (US), and Yellowstone National Park.  I think maps would also be useful &mdash; something I can help with.  ---Aude 08:01, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Classic Rock
Hello. I was wondering if you would like to participate in my classic rock survey. I'm trying to find the most liked classic rock song. There is more information on my user page. Hope you participate! 02:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration re-opened
Requests for arbitration/Wilkes, Wyss and Onefortyone has been reopened. Please place evidence at Requests for arbitration/Wilkes, Wyss and Onefortyone/Evidence. You may make proposals and comments at Requests for arbitration/Wilkes, Wyss and Onefortyone/Workshop. Fred Bauder 22:20, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Why did you inform me of this? I have not been involved in the case. RedWolf 00:24, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

removal of Mindvox image
Hi -- you deleted the Mindvox image. It was a logo, and thus fair use. I'm not sure what the stated cr status was, but you could have done a little study first? I'm not the one who uploaded it. Yours, Sdedeo 05:21, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It is the uploader's responsibility to properly identify fair use images. This was not done. RedWolf 06:00, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You should strive to be helpful, and not adversarial, in everything you do on wikipedia. Sdedeo 22:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

uploader notification
G'day there. I've run into a few admins who [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thue#Image_clearing. believe] that uploaders are notified before before images are marked nosource or CSD, and i've been doing that but it takes a great deal of time and messages i do leave are usually ignored anyway. I've noticed you don't do it, and I'm just wondering if thats something I could get away with as well... Cheers Agnte 09:31, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi. I believe it's a waste of time for the most part to notify uploaders (they tend to get ignored anyways as you have experienced). The upload page has clear instructions that images will be deleted if source and license information is not provided. The CSD criteria clearly states the images w/o source and/or copyright information can be deleted 7 days after upload. There is no strict requirement to notify uploaders. Some feel that uploaders should be notified but I'm not of that belief. However, if I see the "uploader notified" message on an image page, I will honour the additional 7 days. The decision is yours on whether to continue notifying uploaders. However, if I place images on IFD or PUI, then I will notify uploaders as per policy. RedWolf 16:56, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, another question then, is CommunityUseOnly an appropriate tag for the images linked in User:Scientz's page? My understanding is that images under this tag dont need a source. Agnte 17:36, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I was unaware of that tag until you pointed it out. There is no info on the template's talk page but I think this template violates GFDL. All images uploaded to Wikipedia must be licensed under GFDL or a free license. With these licenes, there are no usage restrictions as far as what type of page in Wikipedia they can be used on. So technically, the template is wrong in trying to enforce such usage restrictions IMHO. RedWolf 17:41, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, I found the template here. I've been working out of the nosource area, sourcing images or CSD'ing them.  I believe that there is some ambiguity as to what constitutes image source - it's not really defined anywhere and editors put items in CAT:NS for conflicting reasons. I've posed the question here and I'd appreciate your .02 :).  Also, my understanding is that Non-free fair use in images can uploaded to wikipedia - it seems to be allowed on Special:Upload and in WP:FU. Agnte 18:05, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Question
Hi Redwolf. Just a question. Where can I find a list of all articles that are being considered for speedy deletion? Thanks -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 17:10, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 17:13, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

no source
I refer to - you listed my image as no source, when my source was clearly stated - GFDL, user-created. In fact, it should be obvious that all the images are either created by me, or from helpful volunteers who were helping me create these myriad of images, that require precise positioning in order for the images to be symmetric. It should be obvious from the simplicity of the images that what the source was, but it is also not something easily recreated, as the symmetry has to be precise. I am very infuriated over this. Why did you list as no source? Why didn't you contact me, as per procedure? It's been three months now and I didn't know a single thing about it, an integral part of the system. Now a piece of my hard work has been deleted, thanks to you. Please undelete it. Sorry for the tone, but I'm quite upset that an image I uploaded was deleted without me being notified, and that it was deleted in the first place when it was very obvious where the source was from. I had painstakingly listed all the similar images, if you didn't see, listed how it was used, and you would think I had got off some copyrighted website? -- Natalinasmpf 18:56, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I looked at the image history and there was no info provided on the upload comment nor the description page before I added the no source tag. The admin who deleted it also referred to a comment on a user page. Each image is checked on its individual information. There is no formal requirement of notifying uploaders when no source or no license is added to the page. The upload page is clear that it is the uploader's responsibility to provide proper source and licensing information on each image they upload, otherwise it is subject to deletion. Images cannot be undeleted. You might be able to find it on a wikipedia mirror by using the google image search. RedWolf 19:20, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The comment on the user page refers to a discussion on Jimbo Wales' talk page, and had little relevance, other than to delete images without sources. What do you mean there was no info on the image description? There was an entire storehouse of information (albeit on every image) on that image comment. There was also a Template:GFDL on it. It was obviously user-created by me, why didn't you check the context beforehand? This is a severe disappointment for me, there is an entire project at Template:Game of Go position... -- Natalinasmpf 19:25, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It was not obvious to me it was user created as there was no info on the description page. The page history shows you uploaded it on 18:01, May 9, 2005 but no comment was provided when uploaded. The next revision was my addition of the "no source" template. The image description page history does not reflect your comments. RedWolf 19:30, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It said "GFDL" on it. It was also obvious, given that I could create the image in something like paint, it was not a photograph. All the images uploaded in this manner transcluded Template:Weiqi-image, which clearly gives its circumstances. Wouldn't it be more polite to contact me? Furthermore, all the language used in the image description (provided by the template) clearly showed it was user-created, since the images were named and created to be used for the template. That is clearly evident that it was user-created. You don't just download images off the web to be used for some random template that has been constructed with painstaking precision. It's funny how you didn't delete the 200 other images. -- Natalinasmpf 19:34, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Also, what other images of mine did you delete I do not know of? I skipped the deletion review process and uploaded the same thing anyway, well, because I honestly don't think there's any debate about its source. Can't people who go around deleting stuff be more careful in the future? -- Natalinasmpf 19:47, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

image taken by friend
Hi, I'd like to re-aupload the image I've put on the Blind Myself entry (and removed by you), but don't know what form I should provide the authors statement about the copyright. I guess it's not enough if I say, that "she told me that ...." thnx Gergely Vass
 * Whoever you are (please sign your posts). Feel free to re-upload it but make sure you provide source information on the upload page. Failure to do so will likely mean it gets deleted again. RedWolf 01:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, sign added. But I still don't know in what form should I provide the statement from the author indicating that she is releasing all rights. (I also uploaded a logo to Blind Myself, could you check it wheter it is good to stay?) thnx Gergely Vass

Deletion of "El Gordo's Revenge"
greetings. i noticed you were the final voice to delete the entry "El Gordo's Revenge" - reference info found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/El_Gordo%27s_Revenge

user JJay flagged the article as a copyright violation of this page: http://www.stlscene.com/band-index.asp?BandID=6175

it's good to know you all know how to use google, but you are all wrong.

the stlscene article is the copyright violation of El Gordo's Revenge's myspace.com bio found here: http://www.myspace.com/elgordosrevenge

the myspace.com account is managed by the retired band members, you should contact them to verify their authorship of the article, then re-post it as it does NOT violate copyright guidelines, and El Gordo's Revenge are a quintessential component of the history of punk rock music in St. Louis Missouri.

regards, nick normal


 * Regardless of the true source, the bottom line is that it was a copyvio. No permission was provided to post the text verbatim under GFDL. All text/images on websites are copyrighted by default unless explicit licensing terms are otherwise provided on said web site. More than a week was provided for the real authors to come forward. If the band wishes to create an article on Wikipedia, they are free to do so. Just that if they copy it straight from their website, they should inform Wikipedia that they are releasing the text under GFDL. RedWolf 01:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

deleting dymond
Why did you delete the entry on Alfred Hutchinson Dymond? Eric Dymond


 * Without the exact link, I can't tell you for sure but I suspect it was a copyvio. RedWolf 04:45, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

My photos
You put tags on two of my pictures, saying that there was no source for either of them. I would have appreciated if you had taken the trouble to bring this fact to my attention at the same time that you tagged them, so that I could have dealt with the situation, rather than your leaving me in ignorance of what you had done, which I consider to be uncivil on your part. If you had taken the time to inform me that the photos contained no sourcce, and were in danger of being deleted, then I would have considered that more courteous. The leaving off of the copyright information from the pages was an accidental oversight, and could have been fixed easily, had you chosen to notify me personally. Figaro 05:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Information on providing source information is strongly hilighted on the upload page. The responsibility is yours not mine. I sometimes tag hundreds of images in a day, notifying most uploaders is a waste of time. RedWolf 05:17, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:MustafaKemalABC.jpg
I've been looking on Google and I've found two websites with that picture (and oddly, both had the same file name, but wasn't the same as the one above) here and here. No idea which site the uploader of the image got it from. Also, I've tagged the image with the PD tag. I'd imagine the fellow who took that picture is dead, but I'm not sure if I should slap on the PD-old-50 or 70 tag. Thoughts?--Kross | Talk 09:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * PD old 50 is probably what I would choose unless more info on the photo date can be found. RedWolf 05:19, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, it would have been taken sometime on or before 1938, the year Ataturk died.--Kross | Talk 05:54, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yea, since 70 could still be possible, that's why I suggested 50 as that would be safest w/o further info. RedWolf 08:16, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Star Wars images
Why have you deleted ceratin images from Star Wars articles, namely and ? This was an unnecessary act of viciousness and quite frankly I think it ought to be reported as vandalism. Thankyou--Billy Goat 04:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * In accordance with CSD policy, images w/o source and licensing information can be deleted. RedWolf 06:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

need some image protection
Image:Bill Gates1.jpg keeps getting vandalized by someone using sockpuppets.--Kross | Talk 18:06, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

article?
is this an article of a famous person http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenan_Tarabishy ? HoneyBee 14:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Redirects left over
When you deleted EUMA, the redirect Euma was still left over. Also, AIBD was left over from Asia-Pacific Institute for Broadcasting Development. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

George Reeves Project
Hi there, get in touch to georgereevesproject@yahoo.com to answer your questions and I am new here, so I dont know if I am doing this right, this is the only way to send you this message...

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!
HAPPY NEW YEAR!! RedWolf!! --  Mac Davis  &#xE0D;&#x19B;. 10:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

William Harrah photo
This photo was a publicity photo taken in the 60s at an event by the Phi Delta Theta fraternity. It was scanned by me and thus does not appear anywhere else on the internet. So I don't exactly know how to tag it. --Dysepsion 20:07, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Since you only scanned it, you are not the copyright owner. Unless you know who took the picture so they can be contacted, the image will have to be deleted. RedWolf 20:10, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Considering the people who took the pics are probably dead, you can contact the staff at www.phideltatheta.org. I do have authority to represent their organization since I did work on their website. But since this entire subject is small, go ahead and delete it. --Dysepsion 20:17, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * On the image description page, please provide any additional info on the photograph, such as probable date. This may be enough to declare it as PD w/o the image having to be deleted. RedWolf 20:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC)