User talk:Vianello/Archives/2012/August

File permission problem with File:Cichlasoma bimaculatum.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Cichlasoma bimaculatum.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I plead no contest. If I borked up my understanding of copyright somewhere along the line, it'd hardly be surprising. Just for your information and all, I have no objection with going ahead and trimming it if I messed up. - Vianello (Talk) 17:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Microgastrinae.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Microgastrinae.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. &mdash;innotata 17:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

The San Francisco Naturalist Society
As an administrator, would you watch this article? The author removed the notability tag I added five times despite warnings. I haven't found any reliable third-party sources so I may take the article to AfD later today. Thanks! SwisterTwister  talk  17:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'd be all right with that. I do think it looks like it'd warrant an AfD in its present state, unless you or someone else can dig up external coverage. I tried a cursory glance just now and wasn't able to dig anything up from any news sources. I've put a once-and-final edit war warning on User talk:Asm89. Despite midnight passing during the back-and-forth, their edits were tightly grouped enough that they almost certainly violate WP:3RR. However, enough time has passed since then without further ado that I think it's probably settled for now, and blocks are preventative, not punitive. I will make sure no action is taken out of line. Thank you for contacting me. - Vianello (Talk) 23:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)