User talk:Ww2censor/Archive25

Talk page • Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 • Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 • Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 • Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 • Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 • Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 • Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 • Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 • Archive 25 • Archive 26

DYK for Little Arthur Duncan
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

listas in WP Ireland
FYI... in biography articles, listas should only be added to the WikiProject Biography banner. All banners will use this value for listas. If listas is added to WikiProject Ireland banner, other banners will not use this value depending on where the Ireland banner is used. So, there is no need to add listas to the WikiProject Ireland banner if it is a biography.

I like the red box at the bottom of the talk page giving instruction. More likely for people to see that box than one at the top. How do you add that in? Bgwhite (talk) 23:49, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Interesting, I use a script to place project assessment into the talk page of articles and the full assessment banner is pre-configured, so I need to remember not to fill in the Listas for people articles, or remove it before saving the page. Am I correct in assuming that the biography project will eventually get around to adding its banner to biographies that are not yet assessed? I think that should avoid the problem.


 * Regarding the red warning box, it may be better being placed at the bottom of the page than the Edit Notice at the top, but still not all editors follow the instructions. Some people just can't read! Just copy the div style paragraph you will find beneath the Happy Christmas image code in Section 0. Then play with its placement and content. I got the basics from User talk:BrownHairedGirl after asking her. ww2censor (talk) 06:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * In theory, yes. :)    If the biography is of a living person, there are bots that tag it with WP Biography.  The bot doesn't add listas, but the article does go into a couple of tracking categories and listas eventually gets added. This is how I came across your new articles.  If the article is about a dead person, a person has to manually add WP Biography.  Most people don't add listas, so it ends up in the same tracking categories as living people.  I've added/fixed alot of listas/DEFAULTSORT to ancient Irish royalty articles.  They either didn't have WP Biography or the sort value was done wrong.  Sort value was "last name, first name", but there is no last name for ancient Irish names.  I know there are still a ton of articles that haven't been fixed.


 * Congrats on being around for six years. Isn't that 80 Wiki years? Man you are old.  I've only been active for two years, so I'm in my rebellious teenage years.  No, I won't get off your lawn.  Bgwhite (talk) 21:46, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Windsofchangeza
Apparently he was never directly blocked ... the unblock request I declined indicated his proxy was blocked. Perhaps I should look into a direct block. Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I gave him a final warning for that. If he continues to do so and you can't get hold of me, just put it on AIV. Daniel Case (talk) 19:02, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Season's tidings!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 13:53, 25 December 2011 (UTC).

Auroville Marathon
User:thebigbee Reply to my talk page. I am one of the organisers of Auroville Marathon and design does not have any copyright restrictions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebigbee (talk • contribs) 16:26, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Images
I didn't notice that I hadn't filled in the copyright information then. Your reminder has been incredibly useful. Thanks, Rifasj123 (talk) 02:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Good. Please remember that if you found the images in books or on the internet, the images need to be verifiably freely licenced by the copyright holder unless you are claiming fair-use, which is very stringent for few cases, so the images MUST comply with all 10 non-free content policy guidelines. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 02:32, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I would like to delete the picture.
Hi there, I am new to uploading images. I have a few messages telling me a few pictures that I uploaded are of 'speedy deletion'. They are of the article Great Rann of Kutch. I would like you to delete those pictures not just the one that you have indicated. I will definitely not upload any more picture until and unless I am fully aware of all the related information on media. Thank you for your time and I shall be more careful in the future. If you are unclear please get back to me. Rudvedic (talk) 15:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the request but, because I am not an admin, I do not actually delete images even though I review their copyright status. All the images you uploaded are tagged for deletion and will be deleted in due course which is usually about 7 days after they were tagged. You can add the template db-author to each image if you would like to get it deleted more quickly but it is not necessary. You may not be aware that most images found on internet websites are copyright to someone and without their permission we cannot use them. The copyright status must be clearly free for us to use. You may find it useful to read my image copyright information page to understand some of the issues image uploaders encounter. Ask again if you have any problems. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 16:54, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand. Thank you for your time and support. I really appreciate it, the information is vast hence a little challenging to understand for a layman like me, but hopefully I'll read and understand it thorougly before editing anything. I have already asked my friends to donate photos of their own with their assent so I and other like minded friends don't have to go anywhere else to look for them. Thanking you once again for everything and wishing you best of luck. Rudvedic (talk) 12:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

type64smg.jpg
File:type64smg.jpg

I sent a copy of the email giving me permission to use this image (as well as others on the page) to what I believe to be the correct location. "permissions-commons@wikimedia.org" How I am supposed to post images if the branches of wikipedia are apparently unable to keep track of each other, making it some sort of competition to delete them? Produce4022 (talk) 23:12, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * If you look at the deletion notice on the image or the notice on your talk page, you will see that, because the image was uploaded here, you should have sent your email to: permissions-en@wikimedia.org but you sent the permission to the commons having uploaded the image here. There is no competition between the branches and all would be well if you had been consistent. Just repeat your email permission to the above mentioned email stating the name of the image and that it is here not on the commons. Be patient and I will tag the image as permission pending. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 00:55, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the information I have received from you. I have re-sent the email to the appropriate inbox.  I was unaware that there are multiple email addresses from which to get image permission.
 * Thanks again for your assistance and patience. Produce4022 (talk) 01:10, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem. I hope it works out. ww2censor (talk) 01:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Perfin
I am Secretary of the Perfin Club of New Zealand and Australia. The Club currently does not have a web site, but hopes to establish one in the future. The web site which has been recently linked to the Perfin page via "Perfin Club of New Zealand and Australia" (www.perfins.com.au) is a private web site about Australian perfins which is not a web site of the Perfin Club of New Zealand and Australia. Perhaps you may care to remove "Perfin Club of New Zealand and Australia" from the list of clubs until such time as the Club's web site is built? Thank you. Cedars 2a (talk) 22:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Muckross Stream
Hello,

You marked my article for deletion regarding the Muckross Stream in Donnybrook Dublin. You say you lived on top of the area mapped out for 40 years and that you never heard of it. There are plenty references to this stream existed on the internet, however sadly there is no written source. I myself am from Donnybrook and have taken on personal research at my own time to record and map its course. My sources come from local knowledge stretching back more than 40 years. I have also in my possessions a written photocopy of article mapping the course of the stream. I am not wikipidia code literate and my time is limited in given to research and documentation. I think it is a lost record for future generations if this information is not allowed in some forum and given more time I could have obtained the stringent source requirements. It is time consuming and hard work and effort to research and document items of this nature, but only takes 1 second to erase all that. I believe the article (whilst not deformatry or incorrect) was deleted because of your influence over the wonderful world of wikipedia, which in itself brings the project into question if influence by opinion wins out over fact by locality.

Kind Regards Sean Brennan Tradmusicman (talk) 13:34, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I doubt that it was my influence that got the image deleted. Wikipedia requires Reliable sources to verify the article in the encyclopaedia, so if Muckross Stream has such source then it certainly will be kept but without them they won't stay. Unfortunately we don't accept original research as a source no matter how much time you spent researching and finding information. Where is the article you mention from? Is it published in a book or journal? We certainly accept facts but they must be verified, not just recollections. If you do find reliable sources you are welcome to start the article again though you could start a draft in your own user space adding to it as you find the sources, such as here; User:Tradmusicman/Muckross Stream. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 15:35, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Getting the hang of it now. I've requested the article to be restored and now find it on User:Tradmusicman/Muckross Stream as suggested. It's taking time to get used to wikipedia speak and code but I'm confident of progressing.  I'll hunt down more reliable sources but am confused between references and sources. I can find many places on the internet google search where the stream is referenced but cannot find a source for the reference. I'll persevere and treck traditional methods such as libraries until I can track down the original source of my information - a photocopy from a book with no chapter title or ledgible name.  Thanks for you help to date. Tradmusicman (talk) 19:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Happy to hear you are getting familiarised with wiki things. References and sources are very closely related things, though references are usually added as inline citations for a source. We cite sources by making an inline citation of a specific website or page from a book or journal. etc., at the paragraph or sentence it refers to and that gets displayed in the references section. You can also have specific sources listed that may or may not be cited. The Gilbert Library in Pearse Street may be a good source for some things like this topic. Old newspapers, which they have an archive of may help you too. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 20:05, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Erasmus Smith
Thanks for reviewing Erasmus Smith. I have been told that he is a controversial figure in Ireland & so am rather pleased that the article has so far not been the target of inane attacks etc. - Sitush (talk) 10:51, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I try to keep out of such things wherever possible. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 15:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Sabine Schmitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Top Gear (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

File:nichiren Daishonin Portrait.jpg
Hi Ww2censor, I have added what I believe is the correct Copyright status tag to the image. The original painting is from the 14th-15th Century, which is obviously in the Public Domain. However, the photo I have uploaded, is a photo of the original. But, as far as I know, a copy of an original, cannot be subject to copyright. Please let me know if this is correct. And thanks for your message. Steve (talk) 14:07, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * This commons image File:Nichirendishonin.gif already existed for several years but I have added the information template to your upload and filled in what I can. Can you add any of the missing details? ww2censor (talk) 17:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I have added the name of the person who painted the original. Thanks for adding info to the image. I did see the other image, but the advantage of the one I uploaded is that it's bigger. Thanks. - Steve (talk) 17:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem. You probably don't even need the older lower resolution image which does not seem to be as good quality either. ww2censor (talk) 17:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help! Please feel free to add the image to Wikicommons, or make any other changes. I would, but I'm still quite new to editing Wikipedia [uploading the image was a big enough task for me, LOL]. - Steve (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Flags
As per the Wikipedia policy, it is OK to use flags if the person represents their country. There has been precedence that shows riders were representing their countrys. There was the controversial incident involving Kawasaki rider Gary Nixon at the Venezuelan round of the 1976 Formula 750 world championship. The FIM refused to ratify Nixon's apparent victory in the event which eventually ended up costing him the championship. His appeal to the FIM was presented by the AMA not Kawasaki, which begs the question why the AMA was involved unless Nixon was racing under the auspices of that governing body and thus representing America. ( http://books.google.com/books?id=z_gDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA4&lpg=PA4&dq=American+Motorcyclist+Pat+Hennen&source=bl&ots=BdpKwa2g1t&sig=5PBFS9qyXkAB5B-dTRNl3u5DiQw&hl=en&ei=x77aSr3OO4fg8QbKtYm3BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=American%20Motorcyclist%20Pat%20Hennen&f=false ) It's my understanding that Grand Prix competitors need to be licensed by their home country's governing body and only then are allowed to compete by the FIM. Riders don't represent their employers but their nation's governing body. For instance, in the FIM's eyes, Colin Edwards is an AMA representative in MotoGP competition, and thus is considered an American representative. In a sense, riders do represent their countries as they need to have a racing license from their home nation's governing body in order to compete in FIM events. In this article from 1979, the FIM advised the AMA that is was suspending Kenny Roberts for his boycott of the 1979 Belgian Grand Prix (http://books.google.com/books?id=FvgDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA36&dq=kenny+roberts+american+motorcyclist&hl=en&ei=o6QITeWbOoOBlAee583AAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0 ccoQ6AEwAjg8#v=onepage&q=kenny%20roberts%20american%20motorcyclist&f=false).Orsoni (talk) 18:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * The flags I removed yesterday and in the past is based on the policy that nationality should not be promoted or given weight or credence in the infobox which is what I removed. This is an entirely different issue to the one you mention above where the country one represents is being mentioned and for which a flag is inserted. What you wrote above is exactly what my understanding is of the representation issue. You specifically mention Gary Nixon but his entry has no infobox, so the point, for now, is a non-issue. Certainly we use flags in various tables showing results and these entries represent the country of participation though personally I am against WP:FLAGCRUFT. Take someone like Ben Drinkwater whose flag I removed. While he is British and therefore a UK citizen, I presume, he would be representing England with the 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 flag and that flag would be entirely incorrect for his nationality. On the other hand, someone born in Northern Ireland, or under some specific criteria in the Republic of Ireland before 1948 but living in the UK per the Ireland Act 1949, or in the UK of Irish parents, may be entitled to both/either British and Irish nationality and could ride or represent either but maintain the opposite nationality which for all practical purposes implies citizenship. BTW there is actually no official Northern Ireland flag. However, just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, let's wait a see when, and if, Scotland obtains some form of independence. I don't see any reference to Kenny Roberts' nationality or country of representation in the link you gave, so can't comment on that issue. As I said, I am against flagcruft, but a solution might be to add a specific country representation field to the infobox which would not promote or give weight to the person's nationality and therefore not contravene the MOS:FLAG guidance but what does the flag really add when it can be clearly stated in the prose what country the person represents. ww2censor (talk) 19:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Heroes Welcome
Hi Thanks for your help and advice, Heroes Welocme is a collection of over 40 communities spread across the UK and Perhaps  a little like Wikipedia in that we are an informal grouping so as a voluntary admin my role is perhaps a little similar to yours. I have read the conditions and do understand the need to be objective and neutral, hopefully this is reflected in the quality of the article. Having spoken to our sister organistanions, the major Uk military charities, I undertsand that they have either had to pay an officer to learn Wiki or a professional company to prepare an article on their behalf which seems less appropriate. Again Many thanks for the advice and I will try to sort the logo. Best regs Fwe506 (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Having people edit Wikipedia articles for you is highly frowned upon but I sure it happens without us knowing or being tracable. Besides the WP:COI aspects I mentioned on the MCQ page, you should possibly also read WP:NOT especially WP:NOTPROMOTION which applies in your case. Articles should be written because the topic is notable and not for other reasons. We are looking for editors who are interested in contributing to articles in a constructive manner, I'm not saying you won't, in a wide range of topics or even a narrow one that they have knowledge of. However, coming to Wikipedia just to write an article to promote or make your organisation known is not really helpful in the long run and does not promote a longer term positive editing experience for you; you are here and then you're gone but it happens. I would encourage you to edit because you like it not just to promote an organisation you happen to belong to. Consider what your editing contributions will be in 12 months time? It can be a rewarding experience. Anyway, good luck. ww2censor (talk) 23:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Again many thanks for the advice and I will and do take a wider view so will continue add to Wikipedia as and when possible. Thanks Fwe506 (talk) 10:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Script testing
Hi, thanks for your patience in testing the upload script. Could I ask you a favour – would you mind also trying out actually uploading a file? It worked for me in Firefox and Chromium. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I
I am just talking what is happening and somebody may add the contents to the United StatesPostal Service article. Eveyone knows we talk and it is not news, but let me add this in a different title thus not news -- GoShow (...............) 16:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * If this topic is something encyclopaedic which may be used as a reference within the article and would add something of value to the article you could discuss it. In that case you can link to an external link with the subject you which to discuss. All your post is, is a promotion to get people to contact their representative and that sort of canvassing has no place here. When and if these proposals are implemented it may be a useful addition for a mention in the article itself. ww2censor (talk) 16:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Alright, thank you--GoShow (...............) 16:32, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Central ky.jpg
I had uploaded an image for "Central Kentucky", of which I had obtained permission from the image's creator (a Kentucky State gov't agency), and which, I'm fairly certain, I went to great lengths to indicate, appropriately, and discovered, today, that it had been "speedy deleted" by "mabdul" 21:14, 29 December 2011, and that "ww2censor (talk) 20:56, 29 December 2011 (UTC)" indicated there was a copyright issue. There was no "speedy deleted" indicator on the "Central Kentucky" page, which is now pretty much void of anything relevant. I can replace the photo, but I would have to dig around for the e-mail from which I had obtained permission from the aforementioned agency. Please advise as to what I should do, if anything. Thank you.

Skaizun (talk) 21:23, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for asking. Actually the image you refer to was deleted by Fastily with the note that it was a: Media file copyright violation without fair use or credible claim of permission, so I doubt permission was even indicated but you could ask him. He is a decent guy who know his stuff. Image deletion notices are not usually places in the articles but on the image files themselves and the original uploader is notified. However, we don't actually accept the say so of uploaders, some of whom have unfortunately been untruthful, so we request that you ask the copyright holder to directly verify their permission with our OTRS Team by following the procedure found at WP:CONSENT. The image can then be restored by them if you tell them the exact original file name for the copyright holder to refer to. You may also find it useful to read my image copyright information page. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 21:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Although I appreciate your response, especially after presenting the details of the deletion, I'll never waste my time doing anything like that, again, especially as the process is convoluted and untrusting, not to mention that it allows any troll or vigilante - - however "decent" or well-intended - - to report or remove content without so much as notifying the contributor, much less that the vast majority of content on Wikipedia is impossible to verify. I went to the trouble of finding a relevant photo, contacting the owner, and getting permission to use the image, and then had it rejected, regardless of the reason, which makes editing Wikipedia not worth my time and trouble, any longer, as I would not make willy-nilly changes. There needs to be a mechanism to identify trolls, newbies, good contributors, et al. When a system chastises or otherwise repudiates an intelligent individual for doing the right thing, then the system needs to be changed; I won't hold my breath on that. Skaizun (talk) 14:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You have yourself pointed out some of the very reasons why some processes have become more stringent. In the past editors were able to add images and prose with little or no oversight and while I am certain some of that still happens today, there is increased vigilance by volunteer editors and bots to monitor some of the issues you mention. I am sure you agree that we should be wary because not all editors are truthful, don't provide reliable sources and make false licencing claims. While years ago we used to accept uploads in good faith third party images need to be verified by the copyright holder and your image would stay if the copyright holder confirmed their permission but you did not know we are so strict otherwise you could easily have got them to provide the permission directly to the OTRS team. We have seen false permissions claimed by uploaders and for that reason we now request a direct verification. We also appreciate the work of constructive editors. It is not that we don't trust you, chastise you or repudiates you, or that we suggest you are lying but we need to verify what you say is accurate and truthful in regard to images uploaded. I am sure you can appreciate that prose can be relatively easily checked if a source are provided. It is of course your choice at what level you contribute, be it willy-nilly changes, extensive rewrites of existing article or the creation of new ones, we appreciate your contribution no matter their size or apparent importance. Anything that improves the encylopaedia is welcome. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 15:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Positioning of Toponomy
You accused me of "removing" a section "I didn't like". I did not do that. I didn't remove it, and I do like it. The piece on Toponomy is interesting but is arcane to most readers and is objectively less important than a general history of the town. Its current positioning therefore, above the history for the town, is unwarranted. This article on Wicklow was taken from Stub by me years ago and I've contributed anonymously (Geography, Growth of Town, Meaning of Cill Mantain, Story of Mannteach, History of Black Castle, Presence of Abbey Ruins, Presence of Norman Names, References and story relating to the 1641 rebellion, atrocities carried out by Coote etc.) for years only recently taking on this ID. I've laid out my reason (again) for its positioning further down the page. I Invite you to justify your undoing of the considered (and correct IMO) movement of the section. Het Masteen (talk) 00:31, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually you are correct, you moved the section and did not remove it. I must have been too tired when I made that revert. So I'm sorry, I have reverted my revert. Indeed, the article has been improved significantly over the last few years. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 04:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Need Example
Hi, I was sent the following message (below). I am currently trying to get an email from the true owner of this photo so I can have it included on the new page I created. I was told by another editor to tag it as CC-BY-SA. So I am thinking when I get the notice of permission and send it through the OTRS process I will be good to go.

Is it possible for you to send me what you consider to be a perfectly cited image? That would be very helpful.

Thanks for all of the work that you do File:Nextant 400XT CFG.jpg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NP1985 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 29 February 2012


 * Happy to help. All you have to do is get the copyright holder, who may not actually be the owner of the image unless it was a work-for-hire situation, to verify their permission to our OTRS Team by email to use their image under a free licence. Tell them to follow the procedure found at WP:CONSENT. You can't just tag it CC-BY-SA because you don't know that the copyright holder will release it under that licence, which they may or may not do, so let's hope they agree. When OTRS team are satisfied with the permission they will add an OTRS Ticket to the image to show the permission and licence has been verified. If by any chance the image get deleted before the permission arrives don't worry as the image will be restored at that time. Make sure the copyright holder quotes the full and proper name of the image. You may also find it useful to read my image copyright information page. Hope that helps. ww2censor (talk) 22:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Very helpful, and thank you for the time you took to respond. I do my best to be compliant and helpful feedback is always appreciated.


 * Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.9.124.97 (talk) 13:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Archive links
Dead links are a continuing problem, many times when going over an article I've found potentially productive links that are neither alive nor archived, so sometimes when I find a link that has a reasonable potential to become dead, I check it to see if it has been archived, and if not, I attempt to archive it using WebCite; but if it is archived at Internet Archive, I say why waste the work, why not put the archive data in there now. I notice that the Cite template has a switch that can be set for whether the original url is alive or not. An additional problem is that sometimes links are not dead, but the data on the page has significantly changed, sometimes eliminating the very thing for which it was cited. So in my own work, I try to remember to archive all important references that have a reasonable potential for going dead, in other words not Google Books. I am taken by surprise sometimes, such as when all of the U.S. Interior Dep't disappeared about 2001, or when the National Biological Information Infrastructure went down 15 January 2012. Overall, I think that editors should pay more attention to archiving. As to why I didn't put the archiving data into the Cite template, I was in a hurry (called to dinner) and could not remember the switch to say original url active, and forbore to look it up. --Bejnar (talk) 00:31, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Seems like a reasonable enough explanation. I too am aware of the sudden disappearance of some links, though I will likely wait until the links go dead rather then search out the archive now. Good luck and thanks for the reply. ww2censor (talk) 02:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Martin S. Bergmann
Hi. You recently commented/edited my Martin S Bergmann article. You cite that his appearance in popular culture needs references. However, it seems that references to Imdb are blacklisted, and there really aren't any other sources, except first hand experience... What do you suggest? --Torsrthidesen (talk) 12:27, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Far too many article are missing citations. All articles need citations and any questioned statements should be sourced but if there are no reliable sources then you are unable to verify the statements, so that section will likely need to be removed. Otherwise it is just WP:OR which is not permitted. BTW, no one owns any article. I suggest you search around some more possibly in books and magazines until you find something better. Here and here are two sources that mentions one of the movie appearances. ww2censor (talk) 14:30, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't mean I own it, just that I created it. Or was the catalyst. But, I've always had a problem with wikipedia, almost every article I create is deleted and destroyed, for petty and irrational reasons. But that's neither here nor there. Neither is this: I understand that sources are required, and I've had this discussion many times, it often becoming quite philosophical: If something is common knowledge, why does it need sources? That Bergmann appeared in the Woody Allen film and the Curtis documentary is clear to anyone who's seen it, I've seen it, with my eyes. Paris is the capital of France, would that need a source as well? You see where I'm going... Somethings are clear by first hand experience. And it seems that the job of wikipedia is to secondguess phenomenal experience... But, I will go deeper and find sources for his appearances; However much it is like going around the world in search of ones nose... Peace, love and good health to you, namaste --Torsrthidesen (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I understand your view but, while we know that Paris is the capital of France there are many sources that can verify this common fact, Bergman's appearance is only known to those who have seen the movie or read something related, hence the need to source it because it is not actually common knowledge. Something you have experienced without a reliable source is considered as WP:OR but you seem to understand pretty well the way we work. I can see the frustration at some of Wikipedia's policy, guidelines and rules but there are reasons even if you don't agree. Once we understand them it can be very enjoyable to contribute constructively in an encycloaepedic manner. I am pretty sure any articles you previously created were deleted for good reasons even though you may have disagreed. Some editors find it more useful to start a draft in their own user space until they are happy with the sourcing and/or ask someone else to review it before moving it to the mainspace. I have several drafts that I work on when I get time, such as User:Ww2censor/Maurice Burrus and User:Ww2censor/Charles Coote which are far from ready. I was not sure if you really meant own however some editors really do feel and article they created is their exclusive properly but obviously you just used the word generically. BTW, you used a url to cite another wiki article, we don't doe that and it is already linked in the prose and the citation benatlas would appear to be a personal blog which is not a WP:RS. Hope that helps. ww2censor (talk) 15:19, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And thank you. I'm glad you're such a good sport about it. As for ownership, politically I'm an anarchist, and do not claim ownership of anything (I have published many essays and prose-pieces and I do not ascribe ownership of them either) anyone can change, add or rewrite the entire article at any time. It is when the discussion starts on the validity or necessity of the article I get frustrated. There are thousands of articles on wiki that one could easily claim unnecessary; All such claims are purely subjective. It seems a part of the wikipedia spirit to ignore subjectivity and an absurd claim of any objective reality; Most likely a syndrome of encyclopaedia-writing. Of course there are sources that can claim Paris being the cap. of France, but is it needed? It seems pedantic or anal to always question all utterances, and only slows things down. There is no clear line to what is common knowledge and what needs citation; In fact one can imagine a wikipedia article needing citation for every single word so as to prove the validity of every syllable. But be that as it may. As for using incestuous references, that is references within wikipedia, seemed to be valid, but guess I've learned something new. I will continue to work on the article. Thanks again, and good luck with your work. Namaste --Torsrthidesen (talk) 15:39, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Heroes Welcome
Hi I am trying to upload an image of the Heroes Welcome "corporate" logo, when I indicated that Heroes Welcome UK was the receiving article it came back stating that it is not a proper article but a disambigous page leading to others. whilst I appreciate that the Heroes Welcome UK article is not perfect it is rated C, so I just wondered what this meant. Many thanksFwe506 (talk) 16:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Romansfield
I haven't had a look as yet, but certainly until very recently Romansfield was a school. There wad also a PRU, a Pupil Referral Unit on the same site. I live less than 20 miles away, and at present the school is on its Easter break, so I can't check it out until they return ie sometime after 15 April. Throughgrittedteeth (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you are telling me this but I can't find an article named Romansfield. ww2censor (talk) 03:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Image deletion
Hello! I'm quite new to Wikipedia, and am trying to upload images to the Nicolas Ruston page to illustrate it. I don't fully understand how I've incorrectly tagged the images for copyright. The images were given to me by Nicolas Ruston and I thought I had tagged them correctly, but clearly haven't. I don't want to cause – or get into – trouble! Please could you advise? Ceyoungec (talk) 18:50, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Let me explain a bit and come back if you don't understand. We try to avoid using non-free images as this is supposed to be a free encyclopaedia comprising of free material, however we do permit limited use of non-free images so long as they comply with all 10 non-free content policy guidelines. For artists, if they are alive, a non-free image is virtually always no allowed because it is replaceable with a free image per WP:NFCC. Images of an artist's work must be use in the context of critical commentary about that work with sourced prose to back it up per WP:NFC #7. Merely stating its existence is not enough reason to use an image. Did you take any of the images you uploaded and if so were they a work-for-hire? In that case you could not release them under a free licence because you would not be the current copyright holder but if you own the copyright you are still bound by the artist's own copyright which means your photo is a derivative work and you need the artist's permission to use an image of the art. For the UK you might possible get an exception per commons:Commons:L but I doubt these images qualify for that. I know it is a bit complicated but our non-free policy is more strict than normal. You can likely get away with only one of two non-free images in an artist's article but any images used must have a fully completed non-free rationale which non of your uploads have. You may also find it useful to read my image copyright information page as well as Copyrights. Hope that helps. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Daphne Guinness talk page
I removed an assertion that Daphne Guinness is a "nothig" (sic) and a "waste of space" on the talk page. You referred to this as an act of 'vandalism'; why do you insist on keeping this question on the talk page? It is quite clear that there should be a Wikipedia page on her — she is exemplary of a certain style, has contributed to several books and been the subject of major exhibitions. Please go back to the talk page and remove this (illiterate) comment (which potentially qualifies as vandalism), and also remove the reference to my 'vandalism' you so casually tossed about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.1.77.70 (talk) 02:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


 * No, I referred to the removal of the post as vandalism, not the post itself. Removing content is frequently termed as vandalism if there is no good reason for the removal. In general talk pages should not be refactored just because you disagree with another editor's comments and are there for commentary and discussion about the article. The article itself confirms her notability even though in my opinion it is rather WP:NPOV. If you don't like the comment that is unfortunate but if it was in the article without a reliable source, that would be removed and you would be correct to remove it from there. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 14:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Philately and the British Library
Hi!

I'm currently the Wikipedian in Residence at the British Library, and I've been working with curators here to discuss ways they can work with the Wikipedia community.

The philately department here already has experience of Wikipedia; they worked with one of our editors earlier in the year to help create a series of articles on their collections. They're interested in working with more people to support their writing, either about the BL's philatelic collections or about philatelic topics in general - for example, by recommending sources, or providing comments and advice on finished articles. I'm also working on the possibility of arranging for copyright-cleared images.

If this is something you might be interested in, please do let me know and we can discuss the details!

Thanks, Andrew Gray (talk) 15:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

(I've posted a notice to the philately wikiproject, but I'm also approaching a few active editors directly, so my apologies if you see the message twice.)

Image Copyright
Hello Ww2censor. I am a new user as you know and I uploaded a photo I took recently, and at the time I was not sure how to source and copyright it. But after you marked the image I was able to follow your copyright rules and templated the image as PD-Wmocny. I was hoping you could check on my edit and make sure it checks out so that the photo is not deleted. Thanks. Wmocny (talk) 04:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for asking. I've added the "information" template and you should fill out the missing details, then everything will be fine. You may find it useful to read my image copyright information page. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 14:32, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Gemini Ganesan
I see u have tagged the images of the actor Gemini Ganesan for deletion. But how else do I let them stay? Kailash29792 (talk) 04:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That is rather a problem because you are not allowed to use non-free images in galleries as show in the deletion nominations. Look at the entries in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 May 30. Non-free images require some critical commentary about the image themselves in prose, not just a description of what they show, and a suitable "purpose for use" in the WP:FURG that would justify their use if, but only if each image complies with all 10 non-free conten policy guidelines. You may find it useful to read my image copyright information page. File:Missmalini gemini.jpg may also be a problem because I don't think it is also PD in the US. Hope that helps. Ask again if you need to. ww2censor (talk) 04:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Then I think I'd better re-upload them as free images... Kailash29792 (talk) 04:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * You can't do that because you have no proof they are freely licenced. Just changing your mind that they are now free even though they were non-free because they were nominated for deletion will be a false claim. That will just get you in trouble. If they are really free you must show that. The stamp is definitely not a free image because Indian stamps are copyright for 60 years. I can't say about the other images unless I look at the sources but if you said they were non-free and now you claim they are free, it will be a problems and they will still be deleted. ww2censor (talk) 04:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Sir, what I am saying is that I'll re-upload the images with the correct licenses and fit them in the right place in the way they are supposed to be. I don't know if the Sivaji-Gemini image is free, but I scanned it from a book. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * There is no need to re-upload the image but you can edit the licence and details of the existing image files BUT you must provide appropriate source information that proves the images are freely licenced if you know it to be true. If you scan an image from a book you need to know that the book is freely licenced and that fact depends generally on the date of publication in the country of origin as well as in the USA. Hope that helps. ww2censor (talk) 14:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The deletion nominations are still active and have not been closed, so even though you have changed the information and licencing, you must not remove the deletion notice. An administrator will do that when the nomination is closed. I have reinstated the deletion notices and commented on the new claims made by you on the nomination page. You have not provided any evidence they are freely licenced, as I told you above. You just made claims, so they may still be deleted. You are welcome to comment on my revised reasoning and justify your new claims at the deletion entries for each image. ww2censor (talk) 16:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Here is the best evidence possible: the authors of those pictures are just stupid and common camera men, who may not be alive. Also, both the actors - Sivaji Ganesan and Gemini Ganesan died in 2001 and 2005 respectively. The hockey image was taken from Sivaji's own autobiography. Does that make the pictures usable? Kailash29792 (talk) 04:17, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * No, you can't use them unless you can verify they are freely licenced. How many time must I tell you that? The best evidence does not verify anything. Read the reasoning at the individual deletion nominations to understand why they are not proven to be free. Yes, they dies in 2001 and 2005 but the image cannot be free under Indian law if they were taken within the last 60 years. Also, as I previously stated, make any comments you have at the nominations, so the closing admin can evaluate your claims. ww2censor (talk) 15:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Fine, do what you want with them. I am not intelligent enough to see if the images are freely licensed or not, but i got File:Gemini-ganesan-phone.jpg from here: http://photos.mid-day.com/specials/the-legendary-gemini-ganesan/gemini-ganesan-phone/ can u decide if the image is free or not? Another fact, I very strongly believe it was taken before 1952, so its copyright status should have expired. The Sivaji-Gemini image was surely taken in the 60's and is not free, I surrender it. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:13, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

So, as I suggested already, make your points at the deletion nomination for an admin to decide. It has nothing to do with intelligence as you suggest. It has to do with verifiability and you did not provide anything. You can strongly believe but that is not proof and we must have verification, not claims. When we cannot determine if an image is freely licenced we err on the side of caution, deleting the image instead of keeping it because we take copyright status very seriously and you cannot confirm either of these images' status. ww2censor (talk) 16:22, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Recent Images
Hi, I have uploaded a couple of images that my firm owns. They also have them on their website. How do I cite them? I have found pages that instruct me to cite their creator, owner... but I don'y know how to add this information to the image. (Vtlarstudent (talk) 02:24, 1 June 2012 (UTC))


 * You don't own the copyright so you must get the copyright holder to confirm their permission by following the procedure found at WP:CONSENT. You should also be aware of your WP:COI and you can't just claim images are copyright free when they are found on the company's own website with clear copyright notices. ww2censor (talk) 02:50, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for that page. Could you please remove the images? I will get formal permission from the designers at work before i repost any others. Thank you! (Vtlarstudent (talk) 23:13, 3 June 2012 (UTC))


 * You are welcome. The images have already been deleted which is why they are redlinks on your talk page. You can always get the copyright holder to provide their permission and the images will be restored, so you don't have to reupload them. Just get the copyright holder to tell the OTRS Team what the image names are. You may well find it useful to also read my image copyright information page. Happy contributing. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 23:21, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Buenos Aires 1859 1p "In Ps" tete-beche pair
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Aurochs' head issue
I am going away for a week in several hours, probably without access to a computer, and I do hope to find upon my return that at least one of the hooks qualifies. Also, I would kindly ask that if you think the title should be moved, you do so through WP:RM, since, as I outline on the review page, there are good reasons for using "aurochs". - Biruitorul Talk 13:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Will do and will comment at the nomination also. ww2censor (talk) 15:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Philately
Ah yes, that. I still have an interest, but not a collector as I used to be, its too damn expensive! We could do with some individual articles on stamps I think, if there are any you can think of which are very notable and still missing I may consider it. Sorry to rant on about image policemen but beyond editors sniping at me at ANI there's little more than I hate on wikipedia to be receive multiple deletion warnings by people you consider/ed yourself to be on good terms with and in my opinion seems to be anti-collaborative.♦ Dr. Blofeld  05:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Indeed stamp expense is an issue though I am really a postal history guy. I wrote Buenos Aires 1859 1p "In Ps" tete-beche pair‎ recently, which I found rather interesting to research, and there are some interesting redlinks at List of postage stamps if you want some ideas though some ore much more notable then others. Of course I understand sniping and as I said I usually temper my notices for experienced editors with a gentle nudge rather than a full on warning but as I also said I did not know it was your image until I specially viewed the image log. Let me know if I can assist or make some other philatelic suggestions. Perhaps I should start a "missing" page as I see you have. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 05:41, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah a list of missing very notable individual stamps would be good. I still have the 2004 Stanley Gibbons catalogue in four volumes, haven't updated it, no need to really. It would be good to have a few good articles though on either postal history or stamp articles or editions. Something QEII coronation related would be good. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  05:56, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Statυs  ≠  11:19, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You have comments waiting for you.  Statυs (talk) 17:41, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Jennyatbat image
I attempted the fair use explanation for posting my photograph because after reading the copyright guidelines of wikipedia, the permission that I received from the publisher did not seem like it covered enough. Could you please look at the email exchange of permission that I pasted below and let me know if this would be enough to post the photograph without having any copyright issues. And if it is enough, how do I label it correctly in wikipedia? If it isn't enough, how much more do I need from the publisher? Thank you!:

Jonathan,

The Marin Independent Journal owns the copyright on that photo, which was taken by a staff photographer.

The IJ grants you permission to use the image for the sole purpose that you described and as it appears below. The presentation should include “Copyright Marin Independent Journal” for the image.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Doug Bunnell Executive Editor Marin Independent Journal 415-382-7290 http://www.marinij.com

on 6/5/12 1:04 PM, Jonathan Hludzinski at (email removed for privacy) wrote:

Doug,

Per our conversation, attached is the image I would like to use for my article entitled, "Jenny Fulle". It tells the story of how in 1974 she helped break the ban of girls in Little League, which the Independent-Journal covered in several articles.

Wikipedia is asking that I specify the owner of the copyright. Would that be the Independent-Journal?

It says that I will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. I'm not sure how to answer this one, maybe you are.

Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! Jonathan Hludzinski Jonathanhlud (talk) 00:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)Jonathan Hludzinski


 * Thanks for asking. I did tag the image File:Jennyatbat.png but perhaps you are not familiar enough with the copyright issues to add the appropriate information, so let me try to help you. The image is copyright of the newspaper that published it, so unless it might comply with all 10 non-free content policy guidelines it must be freely licenced which means that anyone can use it for anything including commercial use, and most newspapers will not do that. The permission system works by having the copyright holder directly verify their permission by emailing our OTRS Team. Please have them follow the procedure found at WP:CONSENT. Even though you got an email it is not explicit enough but the OTRS volunteers know what questions to ask and when they are happy with the verification they attach an OTRS ticket to the image. BTW for privacy purposes please don't post email addresses on these pages.


 * It appears you thought that you could claim fair-use in the legal sense but we have a stricter fair-use policy than the legal one, so I nominated it for deletion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 June 8 and explained why it fails our fair-use policy which I hope you understand. You may also find it useful to read my image copyright information page to get a better understanding of the wider topic and the pitfalls. The only way you will be able to get this image kept is with the permission of the copyright holder. Hope that helps but ask again if necessary. ww2censor (talk) 03:33, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * First of all, thanks for your help with all of this. I have reached out to the editor of the paper sending him the link to WP:CONSENT. He has not responded yet, but hopefully he will soon. I am a little worried he will not give me the sweeping permission that wikipedia asks for. As far as fair use is concerned, I can't seem to think of a plausible rationale for the use of the clipping, though I'd still like to at least attempt to craft one. In your time working with wikipedia, have you come across any fair use rationales that worked that you think might help me to craft my own? If not, that's fine, just figured I'd ask. Thank you so much. Jonathanhlud (talk) 22:58, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You may well be right that you will not get the permission we need. The only possible way to keep this image under our fair-use would be if you were to find some independent reliably sourced critical commentary about the image itself, not about what is depicted on the image, and that is not likely to happen. What is so special about that particular image that it was comment on by other newspapers or journals. Most likely nothing. It is just an older image of a tennis player in a newspaper and you can state that in prose without needing to use a non-free image, as I already wrote in the deletion nomination. I suspect you are out of luck. Any other questions just ask. ww2censor (talk) 00:42, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Copyright
I have got message from you saying i have a message at the media copyright questions. i can't find it. can you help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goglogo2 (talk • contribs) 15:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You posted a question on the WP:MCQ page but it has been archived already. The question and reply its are here. BTW, please sign all your posts, though not edits to articles, by placing four tildes, like this ~ at the end of you posts. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 16:40, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you. *sigh* being a 9 year old i wouldn't know. no joke, i am 9!-Goglogo2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goglogo2 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Motorcycling WikiProject
Thank you for the welcome. My first motorcycling-related article will be a biography of former Harley-Davidson CEO Jeffrey Bleustein. It still needs a lot of work, but you can see it in my sandbox if you are interested: User:Cullen328/Jeffrey Bleustein.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  05:04, 25 June 2012 (UTC)