User talk:Touchdown Turnaround/Archive/2006/9 + 1

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Cowman109 Talk 19:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Hellogoodbye
Hi, there. Concerning your recent edits to Hellogoodbye, thanks for your contributions, but you played around with the dates a bit that doesn't conform to WP:DATE, so I fixed that for you. Basically, the mediawiki software automatically takes dates such as January 1 2001 and converts them to the format that people choose in their preferences. Someone who uses the British style of dates, for example, would see the above code as 1 Janury, 2001 (both would be wikilinked). Here's another example - two different dates that will look the same in text, but in the edit window they are clearly different :). January 1 2006, and 1 January 2006. Also, lone years are usually best not linked to unless they are critical to the understanding of the sentence somehow... so generally it's best to just leave lone months and years alone, but should a full and exate date be given, then it should be linked. Sorry for sounding confusing :D Cowman109 Talk 19:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Cool, thank you for the explanation and the link to the manual. I thought I was the one helping it conform to how it should be done!  I understand now.  Please reply here just so I know if you see this or I will reply on your page too!  Touchdown Turnaround 19:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I automatically watchlist pages I edit - my watchlist grows pretty fast :/. Cowman109 Talk 19:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Mila kunis.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Mila kunis.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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.

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. Yamla 21:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

You said: "Why did you delete the picture from Mila Kunis? There was an image in there a few days ago that got deleted for copyright violation.  However, I found a new image that was a studio-supplied screenshot from a film which the copyright information said was OK for use.  I uploaded it and selected the right copyright license."


 * No. The license clearly stated that the image could be used to provide critical commentary on the film and that any other use (such as using it solely to depict Kunis) was a violation of copyright.  Furthermore, the license noted that you have to supply a detailed fair-use rationale for each use, which you did not do.  Sorry.  --Yamla 21:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Please stop adding copyright-violating images to articles, such as you just did to Mila Kunis. --Yamla 21:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The fairuse says "for identification and critical commentary on the film and its contents" and Mila Kunis is part of the content of the film. I updated the image to reflect more fair use information. Touchdown Turnaround 21:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Film screenshots may not be used solely to depict the person illustrated. You are not using this image to provide critical commentary.  Your use has nothing to do with the film.  Now, if you want to add a paragraph that specifically discusses her appearance in this film (that is, what she looks like in the film) and attach the image to that paragraph, its use may pass muster.  At the moment, though, it is a clear violation of copyright.  --Yamla 21:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you're confused. I've replied in detail on User_talk:Yamla. Touchdown Turnaround 22:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

This is my response, copied from my talk page: You are making a natural and entirely understandable mistake that Wikipedia follows U.S. fair-use. In fact, Wikipedia's policies are more restrictive than is strictly required by U.S. law. For example, we require an explicit fair-use rationale while magazines, for example, may be able to get away with an implied fair-use rationale (or can satisfy themselves with a justification if they are sued). Similarly, Wikipedia restricts use of a film screenshot so that it may only be used for identification and critical commentary on the film (and its contents) and not solely to depict the person illustrated. This particular image cannot be used except in the context of providing critical commentary on the film, so cannot be used in the article on Mila Kunis as that article currently sits. --Yamla 22:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I see your point. However, as far as Wikipedia rules, where does it say it can't be used to depict the person in it?  That seems to fall under Wikipedia's fair use as identification of the film's contents. Touchdown Turnaround 23:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Hilton Paris
Hi. Given that you agreed, I have merged the content into Hilton Hotels and so the Hitlon Paris has become indeed a simple redirect. As for deletion of the page, I'm not convinced: the one dilemma that I have is whether it would make more sense to redirect to Hilton Hotels (as it is now) or to Paris Hilton. It's likely that a vast majority of searches for Hilton Paris would be intended as searches for Paris Hilton. In any case, feel free to edit the redirect if you think that makes sense. Cheers. Pascal.Tesson 23:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Cool! I think you may be right, though . . . let me see if I can find another page or template for just listing a few options like the disambiguation templates at the top and see if I can clear  it up. Touchdown Turnaround 23:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Found what I needed and updated the page! Touchdown Turnaround 23:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)