User talk:SteveHopson/User talk:TheMindsEye/Archive/Archive 01 Nov 2007

Awesome
Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, for uploading the picture of the UT Tower under GFDL. This will definitely improve our articles on these topics. Hook 'em! Johntex\talk 04:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * And it looks like this gives you a way to mention your website on Wikipedia to boot :-) (I looked at your Talk page history). I don't think anyone will this method of working it in.  As a matter of fact, I've already visited your web page.  You have some very nice shots there.  I would potentially be interested in a nice enlargement of this shot of the tower, but I didn't see it offered for sale there...  Johntex\talk 04:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Deep Eddy Pool
Steve, the Deep Eddy Pool article you've recently created is incredibly well written. And the corresponding photo was well taken. Thanks! jareha 04:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the copyedit...
Thanks for editing Weezy and the Swish ...

Highway 01:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Category:Art photographers: Why?
Hello. Would you mind taking a look at the talk page of this category that you created? Please reply there rather than here or on my talk page. Thanks. -- Hoary 12:57, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Edie Brickell
Hello, my understanding was that the albums listed on Edie's page were her solo albums. The ones that she worked on with the New Bohemians are listed on its page. Do you think the groups albums need to be also listed on her page? Mrand 16:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * My thought was that she's known more for her work with the New Bohemians than her solo work. However, I'm willing to yield to the majority opinion.  SteveHopson 19:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:SophiaLorenArabesque.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SophiaLorenArabesque.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Rossrs 13:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Point well taken. The photo was taken by myself from a 16mm print of the film.  I have updated the source info on the photo and will document the other photos that I have similarly taken and uploaded.  SteveHopson 04:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

List of photographers
Good to have more help checking out the notability of photographers listed on this page! In addition to checking these names in Google, would you mind checking names in the Union List of Artist Names and also Library of Congress Authorities? There are some important photographers that aren't represented much on the Internet (especially early or non-Euroamerican photographers) and so wouldn't show up in a Google search. Thanks. (By the way, if you haven't used the Library of Congress site before, it's a little peculiar, so please let me know if you want some tips for working with it). Pinkville 02:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the suggestion and support. Its a tedious process, but in checking just a few letters, I found some rather unnotable people had put themselves on the list.  I also found some very interesting photographers who don't yet have Wiki articles.  Once I finish my first check of the list, my goal is then to start creating articles for all the ones without entries already.  Then (if we can ever complete that step), we can establish the principle that all new additions to the list must have Wiki articles.  We follow this principle on the list of notable Austinites in the Austin, Texas article and it helps to weed out the new additions. SteveHopson 02:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. I created some stub articles from this list for a number of photographers who deserve full articles, but that I didn't have time to complete myself. You can see some examples of these, showing sources, etc. in Hippolyte Arnoux and Félix Bonfils and Christopher Williams (artist). Pinkville 03:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I too found that some rather unnotable people had put themselves on the list. When one too many (Murdock) added himself, that triggered a little purge. I noticed that you noticed him, but there are more. Of course, you may disagree with me..... -- Hoary 08:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Belly dance
Cassandra581 07:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:AlfredEisenstaedtLife12201948.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:AlfredEisenstaedtLife12201948.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Genidealingwithfairuse 11:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm just backstopping
your removal of Haisus Gomez from the Tina Modotti article. I've read a lot of what has been published about her in English and this fellow, if he exists, is definately under my radar. I'm moving, so my books and my computer are at different locations, and I will check him out later, but I think OUT is where he belongs. Carptrash 21:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC) PS I just discovered the List of Photographers  hmmm, no blue ? and will be adding at least Baltazar Korab to it in the next week or two - depending on how the move goes. Einar

Myspace
Per your question: Myspace web pages are a dime-a-dozen. On rare occasions, they may actually be the person or organization whom they are representing. But I find in most cases, they are either fans, highly misleading, or even downright illegal. Better to stick with known official pages. Rsm99833 20:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Umlauf photo
The Kiss and The Diver are both Umlauf's. I'll update the caption to make it clearer. -Thanks Nv8200p talk 13:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I have a another image of one of his sculptures, I will add to Umlauf's bio article as soon as I can. It's a closer shot that concentrates on the scuplture itself rather then the garden -Nv8200p talk 13:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:ArmadilloWorldHQ.jpg
Many, many thanks for adding the Armadillo World Headquarters image to the article! -Nv8200p talk 13:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Possessive Singular
Steve, I see your point. I will not do any mass changes for this spelling/grammar/punctuation rule or any similar rule. However, I will:

1. make changes in articles to which I frequently contribute (or watch) if the changes are consistent with the style of the rest of the article (as the Wikistyle guide recommends)

2. make changes in other articles only if the changes are made to avoid confusion AND to reflect common pronunciation (style disputes see Fowler's Modern English Usage (3rd edition) (sometimes the "'s" is used, sometimes not, depending on common pronunciation)

The intention was not to be cute. I see this as somewhat of a limitation of the edit description. Many times, I cannot fit an accurate description into the box and simply shorten it. (Perhaps this could be changed??) If you look at my contribs, you'll see that I almost always give an edit description which can be quite long and may contain a external link. I try to do this as a courtesy so that anyone who reads the edit description can more easily understand what I've changed.

I have posted on your talk page instead of mine because I appreciate your diligence in checking the Wikipedia style guide, your effort in including a quoted portion of it in your post, your ability to see both sides of the debate, and your lack of grammar and spelling mistakes in your post. While this last point usually should not enter into one's judgment of the quality of another Wikipedian's argument, (and I say this with as little disrespect as possible) I hesitate to expend the effort to debate spelling and grammar rules with someone who doesn't expend the effort to spell properly in a short, two sentence post (although I'm sure this user is very talented and well respected in other areas). Thanks. Ufwuct 16:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Photographers: the next stage
Can we move up into third gear? Take a peep here if you have a spare moment. Thanks. -- Hoary 03:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome!
 Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Biography WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of biographies.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Starting some new articles? Our article structure tips outlines some things to include.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every biography article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! plange 19:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Double-squares &c.
Sorry, at present I'm a bit short of time, so I've only inserted the pictures. More is to come soon on the Vincent van Gogh main page.--RPD 18:50, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Alfred Stieglitz
Hi. Thanks for your work. However I'm wondering about your explanation "desaturated image to black and white to more resemble original". Why do you say that? I have to ask-- are you familiar with early 20th century photography in the original, and aware that sepia was much more common than "black and white"? Cheers, -- Infrogmation 02:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Good point. Did you see the copies that I was working from?  If not, here are the files: Image:The Steerage 1907 Stieglitz.jpg and Image:Stieglitz okeeffe 1918.jpg .  My thought is that the tone is so overwhelming that its hard to see the image, and I think the tone must have darkened over the years or was enhanced by the processing of the photos by the person who originally uploaded them.  I don't want to alter the image and wanted to fully disclose the processing that I did for this exact reason.  The photos now more closely resemble the copies that I have seen, both original prints and in book reproductions.  Do you think I should redo the images and leave more of the tone in?  SteveHopson 03:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Armadillo Acts
I see you reverted my mistake already. Sorry about that. I wasn't thinking about where the links went, just trying to be uniform, even though it made no sense. Thanks for correcting it. -Nv8200p talk 04:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Jerry Yulsman/Jerry Uelsmann
Steve, why don't you want to clarify identification of these two photographers? I have spoken to both, and they were both very aware of the confusion. The Internet has only intensified mistaken identities, as note here are messages indicating a belief there is only one such photographer, not two: http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007vXV&tag= ... Even within the world of photography, there are photographers and editors who get the two mixed up. Wikipedia is the ideal place to straighten out the problem. Pepso 17:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Yes, the disambig at top -- Jerry Yulsman -- is the right way to do it. Pepso 15:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Fashion photography
I see you put a {pov} tag on the fashion photography page. The criteria for inclusion on this list is having a Wiki article that discusses the photographer's work in the field. Since the criteria for notability is well-established (see WP:BIO for example), and has a self-policing mechanism (the AfD process), the list is easy to maintain. You will notice that each photographer listed does meet these criteria. Since you did not start this discussion on the talk page, I am answering you here. I'm also removing the tag, unless you want a broader discussion with other editors on the talk page. I'll look for your response here. SteveHopson 23:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm ok with this criteria and I thin the idea of using a comment to explain this worked very well. Good job! --Abu Badali 15:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

FPC suckpuppets?
As i felt sorry for what happened on FPC page, I wanted to tell you that I don't have any sockpuppets. They were my friend's stupidity and I'm sorry. I took the votes off. Arad 23:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

removed links
Steve,

thanks for your email (called a "talk"?) and I'm sorry if I'm doing things all wrong at the moment. I have only just started to use Wikipedia and I am currently drowning in a sea of rules that I didn't know existed.

Anyway, I still feel that the links to the pages on my site are of value to Wikipedia users.

The reason is this - people come to Wikipedia to find out about something (in this case photography), they find it, they read about it, then they want to try it out. . . and that's where my links become relevant. The pages I linked to give people the help they need to try it out for themselves.

I don't feel the tutorials on the pages I referred to would be appropriate in the content of the Wikipedia article itself. But I do feel they are relevant for people who, as I mentioned, want to try things out for themselves after they've read the article. That's why I think they should only be listed as a "resource".

Please let me know what you think, and apologies again for not getting all the procedures right.

Darrell. --Dazp1970 09:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Steve,

thanks for your reply. Yesterday I added to the discussion pages of "Stereoscopy" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Stereoscopy), and "vignetting" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vignetting).

If you could take a look at these I'd be much obliged. Concerning the Stereoscopy page, I have also edited a photo, and made a page on my own website so that people can view it. I think I have solved the problem people were having over viewing the images in the article. I'm thinking of editing this article, but I need a little time to do that properly.

I'll go off now and take a look through some more of those rules & regs - I didn't realise Wikipedia had so many! It's probably a good thing though - definitely helps keep the quality up!

All the best,

Darrell.

Flipside
Thanks for catching the dates on the Flipside Infobox! Were you at the event? Do you know how many people participated? I put the 1,500 figure in there, but that was from the 2005 event - I don't know if it was more or less for 2006. Thanks again! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 00:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Biography Newsletter September 2006
The September 2006 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. plange 00:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Pierre Rossier
Hi, If you're feeling hard up for something to do, check out this article and see what you think! Ciao! Pinkville 02:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi again, I've put Pierre Rossier up as a FAC. If you have some time, please see what you think and comment. thanks. Pinkville 16:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Lucid and edgy (etc)
I wonder if I am I alone in thinking that a curious aroma hangs over Glynnis McDaris. -- Hoary 22:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

License at AnnRichards.jpg
Hello, SteveHopson. I have added the following statement of fair-use rationale to the License area of your uploaded image Image:AnnRichards.jpg:
 * "The image, of low resolution (only 18kb), of an iconic painting (official Texas Governor portrait) is considered to meet a fair use rationale for identification in articles about former Texas Governor Ann Richards which are intended as non-partisan, factual, and expressing a neutral point of view, with no ridicule or parody of events in her life."

I'm not sure if the "Creative Commons" should be removed, but at least, I believe the fair-use statement will prevent image deletion. You have great photos, thanks for contributing. -Wikid77 16:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

B&W photographs of vegetables
Hey, I noticed that you've done a lot of work on the Ansel Adams page, so I was wondering if you might be able to help a friend. A friend is looking for an artist whose work she describes as "like Ansel Adams" who had a photo book of still life pictures of vegetables on tables. Weird question I know, but I haven't had much luck on google. Any ideas/pointers? 70.109.131.95 01:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it sounds like Edward Weston to me. He was a contemporary of Adams and, among other things, is famous for his bell pepper photos. Other photographers who did similar things include Tina Modotti (model and lover of Weston) and Andreas Feininger. Give me a shout back if you need more ideas. SteveHopson 02:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: B&W photographs of vegetables
Thank you very much for your quick reply. I really appreciate it. I talked to my friend and she said neither of the three was who she was thinking of. Any more ideas? Thanks again for all of your help.

24.88.243.237 03:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Have a look at Charles Jones. SteveHopson 19:20, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Keith Carter Portrait
Steve:

I know where I can get a picture of KC to put up on his article. Unfortunately, I'm too strapped for time to figure out how to place it properly on the page. If I sent it to you, could you do me the tremendous favor of putting up there?

jfulbright/helenabucket

Jfulbright 16:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Sure, as long as it meets Wiki's copyright or fair use policies. Thanks, SteveHopson 16:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

LIFE redirects
I'm still trying to learn how things work here. How do I fix redirects? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.253.209 (talk • contribs)


 * See this. (Different site, but same software and same method.) Or anyway this is the answer to the question that I think you're asking.


 * Er, I hope you don't want to change Life to LIFE, and that it's the other way around or something different. The publisher's use of CAPS is no more significant than, say, Sanyo's own use of "SANYO". -- Hoary 07:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Henry Luce bought the rights to the old name "Life", but then launched "LIFE". To this day publications are credited to "The Editors of LIFE". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.253.209 (talk • contribs)


 * Hah! And if the title had been in red, would you want me to refer to it as LIFE ? (Not italics, because the name wasn't in italics.) No, this is mere typographical vanity. Luce was welcome to use all-caps; we're free to ignore him. (Ah, time to leave my office; should I call the missus on her SANYO phone?) -- Hoary 08:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course it's a LOGO, but one with worldwide recognition. Using LIFE also has the advantage of distinguishing it from every other occurence of the word, whether Life or life. Both do pop up with some frequency. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.253.209 (talk • contribs)


 * Sanyo is a trademark that I venture to say has more worldwide recognition than Life has. I can think of very few places where there could be an ambiguity between life the abstract noun and Life the magazine title, not least because of italicization. There are book titles, of course; we can imagine two very different books, Life and Death and "Life" and Death: but there, quotation marks have sorted out that as well. See also Manual of Style (trademarks). -- Hoary 14:33, 8 October 2006 (UTC) ..... PS for a more comprehensive argument, please see this. -- Hoary 04:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Lack of notability
''Delete as per nomination. The article makes two assertions of notability. . . .'' Careful, Steve. As some people repeatedly point out, there's only a guideline to say that the subject of an article must be notable. (Seems nuts to me too, but that's the way it is.) -- Hoary 04:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Point well taken, thanks. SteveHopson 04:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

"Sockpuppet" templates
On this edit of yours: I see where you're coming from, but I don't see how a username can be a sockpuppet of one or more IP numbers. A username being a sockpuppet of another username, yes; and there are other possibilities beside this, but I think in general it's better not to allege that X is a sockpuppet of Y unless Y's edits have been blocked. At least one of the editors involved in this particular little mess has been marching in the direction of a block, but as far as I know no block has yet been made. And there's little point in inflaming an incipient persecution complex. Treat him amicably and he might even reform his ways. -- Hoary 07:10, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello. My name is Tadas. I'm lithuanian. I can't speak in english very good. And I want to please you maybe you can amend mistakes in my essay. :)

''We all are thinking about our future. Fututre in our imagination always, I think, is good. And I believe that my future will be good to.''

''I think that I will have finished 10 class in one year' time. I'll be playing with accordion and be reading books. believe that my marks will be better and I hold examine in next summer.''

''I'll have finished school in five years' time and I'll be looking university where I'll be studying. I think that I will be living in my own house and will work in job, but I don't know in what job.''

''Ill have travelled all Europe in ten years' time. I think that I'll be having a family and will be living in my own house in ten years' time.''

I believe that I'll have a good pay work and I believe that my life will be wonderfull.

I very please you delete mistakes. If you can writte good text in my user talk. Tadas12 15:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

another dubious entry
Hi Steve, You can probably add Brent Murray to your growing collection of dubious entries/possible AfDs on the List of photographers... Pinkville 22:11, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that he is not ready for an article -- especially a self-nominated one. Since I think that he might someday merit an article, I am going to suggest on his talk page that he might want to withdraw this on his own.  SteveHopson 23:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, good point. I'll leave a message (though I've already started AfD...). Pinkville 00:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Yet, you've beaten me to it! Thanks! Pinkville 00:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * But that's just one guy. Unless I've made a major misreading, this threatens to invite them in by the milliard. -- Hoary 07:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Twisting Crucifix
Seriously! Read the Saw III Talk page!I've been trying so very very hard to show to people that the door says "here's your chance" and not "face your fears". Yes, I know there is a FYF door, but the crucifix trap is in the HYC door.In the trailer, in a screenshot I've posted, and on the first source for the trap (confirming it's existance), as well as on other places on the Internet you can clearly see that the door says "Here's your chance".As stated above, please read the Saw III talk page to view these sources.Thanks
 *  ViperBlade  Talk!! 19:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tag
Hi, you reinstated the speedy deletion tag on the article: Alan_Lodge which I created. As Alan lodge has been quite a well known photographer in Britain. His work has documented the 'alternative movements' of the UK for the last 30 years and to me it seems important to include this on Wikipedia as his work is of real significance. I have added refrences troughout the article to other sources. The other admin that put the first tag on the article told me to tidy the article up and add more references which I have. What will be the process from now on? WietsE 13:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:MICHAEL MURPHEY.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MICHAEL MURPHEY.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs 22:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

A project taking over?
Take a look here. -- Hoary 23:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Gone live! -- Hoary 12:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Um, what's a nice guy like you not doing in a place like this? -- Hoary 03:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Point well taken, I'll start working on the HoP soon, very soon. SteveHopson 23:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Spoken like a sensible chap. (If you were to forget again, then a couple of weeks from now Pink n me will send round a couple of heavy-set men in black leather coats to "remind" you. But of course you won't forget, so no problem.) Happy editing! -- Hoary 23:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Annie Leibovitz
The content I added is ok right? (Comment by 208.58.196.156)


 * Yes with two caveats. I think the exclamation mark on the sentence about Leibovitz's age tends to make the sentence not NPOV -- better to just let the readers come to their own conclusions, the ! seems a little heavy handed. On the material about Leibovitz and Sontag, I think the discussion in the article now outweighs the discussion about Leibovitz's photography. Your added documentation is good, but I think the whole discussion needs to be reduced because it is now longer than the material on her art. SteveHopson 23:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

great Dane?
I don't see the logic of your change to the Elliott Erwitt article. Why would you capitalize dane, not great and not the name of another dog species in the phrase (your edit) "great Dane's legs and a little chihuahua"? SteveHopson 23:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * D'oh! Yes, you're quite right. I had a rule for capitalising 'dane' to 'Dane' (which makes sense when it's a person's name, or someone from Denmark). I've added an exception to that rule to ignore it if the preceding word is 'great'. Thanks! CmdrObot 23:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Articles for deletion/Roberta Beach Jacobson
Steve, I'm sorry if I came across the wrong way with my comments. I saw that Rough has been having some trouble getting the hang of things here, and I felt that, in light of this, that perhaps the AfD's were heavyhanded. I didn't mean for my comments to be rude or accusatory, and I reiterate that I apologize if I got the wrong impression. Caknuck 05:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

New Photo Matching Service
Hi there,

I'm contacting you because you listed yourself at Wikipedians/Photographers. You might be interested in a new wikiproject page that lists photographers and articles that need photos by location. The page is located at Photo Matching Service or WP:PMS GabrielF 00:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Photography Projects' names
Allo mate. You might be interested in this discussion regarding the names of the WP Projects History of Photography and Photography. What do you think of Girolamo Savonarola's proposition? Pinkville 00:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree the more general title should apply to our project as it is broader in scope. I also agree that I would want to avoid controversy and not appear to be usurping their title (way to much controversy has erupted over other editorial projects that I've been recently involved with).  SteveHopson 01:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, well said. Changing the names is great in theory, but potentially hazardous in practice. I copied your reply on my talk page to the Project talk page - hope that's okay? Pinkville 01:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course, thanks. SteveHopson 01:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

APUG template problem

 * This was a typing error on my part (overriding the bot). Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough, 22:49 2 December 2006 (GMT).

Photography
About the "dicussion" that me and the IP were having at the photography talk page, could you help us reach a concensus? I do not think that we are about to agree on this subject, so could you provide some input? Thanks, -- Gphoto talk 14:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I haven't weighed in on the discussion (except to try and stop the back and forth that was going on) because I felt it was above my technical level of expertise. I'd be happy to try to help reach a consensus, but I don't think the other editor would welcome my involvement.  SteveHopson 17:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

About removing photographers names who dont have articles
Some of these artists were probably listed because they are important but havent yet been included as an article. I for one peruse this area to get ideas about who I may want to work with. I see no problem with listing non-article artists at all. Artsojourner 16:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I see you even removed several notable photographers. Wow!!! I would like to do an article on some of these one day. Sometimes seeing an artist listed here without an article could possibly give someone an idea about an artist who should justly be included I, for one, would have assumed Sally Mann would have an article by now. Know? My background is photography and I do know a few things. Please be kind. Now if the article were called Lists of photographers in Wikipedia we are talking about something completely different. These people by merit are photographers. Please understand Artsojourner 16:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Good points all. Please be aware that these are not items that I am enforcing by myself -- they have been well discussed on the List of photographers talk page and you certainly are welcome to add your opinions in the mix.  That page also contains a list of photographers who do not yet have a Wiki article.  This list is drawn upon by editors who are seeking to research photographers for new article, and the list is open to all submissions.  We certainly want Wiki to be fully inclusive of all photographers who are notable.  Indeed Sally Mann does merit an article and has had one since March, 2004.  SteveHopson 17:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Isaacs

 * just being the still photographer of a film gives him some notoriety wouldn't you think? I wish there were a way to allow viewers to know how much he has given by way of contributes to so many up and coming photographers but that doesnt seem to help notoriety though and he was selected in the last few years to be in exhibitions that would propel some artists hgher in the ranks. Maybe I could get a list of collectors of his work and companies he has worked with.  He is one of the artists I dont know alot about beside only art contributions but I could try harder.  He is Hard to Wiki with Lee as a first name unless you subtract all of these peole using his first name as a middle name  but you still end up with over 200 articles on google.  I dunno. Tell me something? I'm game. Artsojourner 01:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * See answer at Talk:Lee Isaacs SteveHopson 03:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Isaacs is my vote. This photographer is quite notable. Editor Hoary decided long ago he didn't want Isaacs' on WP for whatever reason. We both obviously see, along with others, that Isaacs work is as notable as half of the photographers on WP whether its art photography and/or commercial photography. I fleshed out alot of this article but I do understand to google Lee Isaacs is not easy  since alot of people have his first and last name as a middle name and last name. I have a book here, UPsouth, that has many examples of his work.  This is a Warhol project grant through Space One Eleven. He is in good company as far as the notoriety of the other artists here is concerned. Emma Amos and bell hooks are in the book along with Willie Cole and Marie Weaver. Cole is the only other male in this project. Maybe someone could sift through some of this. Artsojourner 05:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Ruth Bernhard
I'm looking for evidence also -- I mean, it wouldn't surprise me one way or another, but this editor also changed her birth year from 1905 to 1900 about a month ago, so I do question his sources. Unfortunately, the only person I know who knows her well enough to be informed just spent a couple days in the hospital, so he's out of the loop. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 03:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Right, I've checked all the news sources -- if its true, it hasn't hit the services yet. SteveHopson 03:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, the early reports were true. I've added documentation of her death to the article. SteveHopson 16:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I know Ruth very well. If your friend would like to know something about her she was born in 1905   Her best friend as a child was Tatyana Tolstoy  Leo's daughter. Her father was Lucian Bernhard founder of the German font system and the Bernhard font we use today Her brother Christopher lives in London She is the oldest of 3 children     she did the very first catalog for MoMA  It was her forst commercial job. Anything else? I have every book she has ever had anything to do with with all of them signed at this point and I have some of her photography also. I have her home number and her PA is Mary Ann Helmholtz who has been with her since the 1980's after Mary Ann's husband died. They meet every Wednesday. Ruth sleeps up to 14 hours every single night now  John Stevenson Gallery in NYC did a 100 year retrospective on her in 2005. She continues to wrk with Debra Heimerdinger after working closely with Joe Folberg of "Vision Gallery" since Joe started limited edition photography to give photographers a real chance of having a career of it. Joe taught me everything he knew about photography. Dealing, selling, encouraging and nuance. Let me know if I can be of help. Artsojourner 05:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

San Francisco Chronicle has an article about it. Bernhard sorry to say Artsojourner 15:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the new articles!
Thanks for Photo-Secession and Camera Work -- we really needed both of those articles. Excellent work! — DustinGC (talk | contribs) 18:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I appreciate it. SteveHopson 17:47, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Image watermarking
Hi there, I was scanning over the Music of Austin page and noticed crediting on the image Image:JoeEly.jpg itself. I just wanted to mention that Wikipedia doesn't allow user-created images with watermarking and such. You've copyrighted the image under a CC license, so I guess anyone can take the credit out and relicense it, but I wanted to drop by a message and see if you wanted to do anything in particular. You do good work; nice to see good photographers from here in Austin. Thanks. &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 19:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments and compliment. I was not aware of the policy on watermarking and will revise the photo to conform.  SteveHopson 19:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:JohnLennonByAvedon.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:JohnLennonByAvedon.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 12:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:SophiaLorenArabesque.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:SophiaLorenArabesque.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 06:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Helping out with the Unassessed Wikipedia Biographies
Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of [unassessed articles] tagged with. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 22:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

martin john callanan
Speedy deletion of article. A response is appreciated. Talk:Martin John Callanan‎. Artlondon 20:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * ? I'm for it. SteveHopson 02:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

The article looks very dubious indeed. It's unquestionably about somebody the claims for whom haven't changed much from those made in an earlier, deleted article, but it's not the same article; ergo, an assiduous reading of the rules (no, my memory of them, cause I can't be bothered to read them again) says it's not a candidate for a speedy. There does seem to be a case for putting it to another AfD. (Groan, what a waste of time.) -- Hoary 02:53, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:JacquesHenriLartigue.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:JacquesHenriLartigue.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Yonatan talk 19:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * thanks SteveHopson 23:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The WikiProject Biography Newsletter: Issue II - April 2007
The April 2007 issue of the WikiProject Biography newsletter has been published.You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. BetacommandBot 20:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

image naming
steve, the book cover image you uploaded, "freemanpatterson.jpg" should really be named "thelastwilderness.jpg" or some such. it is really not a portrait of freeman... -- oz
 * Makes sense to me. I've renamed it now.  SteveHopson 03:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:JayneMansfield.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:JayneMansfield.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 13:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:PhilippeHalsmanLife04151966.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:PhilippeHalsmanLife04151966.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:CornellCapaLife09191960.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:CornellCapaLife09191960.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 14:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:AnnRichards.jpg
Hello, SteveHopson. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:AnnRichards.jpg) was found at the following location: User:SteveHopson. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 03:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:PsychedelicYesterdays.jpg
Hello SteveHopson, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:PsychedelicYesterdays.jpg) was found at the following location: User:SteveHopson. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:AnnRichards.jpg
Hello SteveHopson, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:AnnRichards.jpg) was found at the following location: User:SteveHopson/Photos. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 09:50, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Arabesque(film).jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Arabesque(film).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Dermot 15:52, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:GordonParksFSA.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:GordonParksFSA.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU ≈ talk 16:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:GordonParks3.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:GordonParks3.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU ≈ talk 16:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bigr Tex  17:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[[Image:KittyKittyBangBang.jpg]]
FYI, user:davidshankbone is removing all contextual information from captions where your photo is shown, perhaps in a bid to get your photo deleted in favor of his own. Chris 02:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:AvedonLife01261948.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:AvedonLife01261948.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 22:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:AvedonInTheAmericanWest.jpg
I have tagged Image:AvedonInTheAmericanWest.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 22:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:ArtWolfeHighHimalaya.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:ArtWolfeHighHimalaya.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

User talk:67.79.157.50
Hi Steve.

I see that this IP has been used for vandalism. It is a Largo, Florida Public Library account.

Access to the library's computers requires patron sign on. Vandalism is a violation of the library's user agreement. I'm pretty sure library staff can identify abusive users and revoke their access. The library director is Casey McPhee; her email is librarydirector@largo.com.

Come to think of it, this may be a floating IP or one of a range of IP's. I use this computer weekly, and never saw the warnings before. Hope this helps.

Cheers,

Cheers, :) MikeReichold 20:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

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


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  04:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SophiaLorenArabesque2.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:SophiaLorenArabesque2.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 17Drew 04:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:MayPang.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:MayPang.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:CindySherman.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:CindySherman.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Newsletter 5
To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot 16:02, 7 October 2007 (UTC).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BillBrandt.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:BillBrandt.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:27, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ArmadilloComics2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ArmadilloComics2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:45, 27 October 2007 (UTC)