User talk:Yonatan/Archive/Archive-Jul2007

FC Bayern Munich Taskforce
Would you like to join a FC Bayern Munich Taskforce at WikiProject Munich? Kingjeff 20:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:FC_Bayern_Munich_Logo.svg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:FC_Bayern_Munich_Logo.svg. 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  19:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Strauss.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Strauss.png. 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 05:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

celebrations of 9,11 image issues
seeing that your far more in tune with image protocol than me, i would request your assistance on this issue.  Jaakobou Chalk Talk  12:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Received?
I just wanted to find out whether you've received my other message. Let me know either way,  Tewfik Talk
 * Just checking for receipt, as circumstances may be about to get chaotic.  Tewfik Talk 08:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

They broke down after the NPA/CIV filibustering, but the last one was held here. Unfortunately it was somewhat refactored by the other user, so not everything is in its original context.  Tewfik Talk 18:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow, thanks for messaging - I got rid of the bar but forgot to read it :-) . Re vpp, I had previously tried to discuss it there, but no one had wanted to get involved. What I thought would be most productive was to discuss it with editors familiar with the images and commons, like yourself. Any ideas as to how that could be accomplished?  Tewfik Talk 03:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Can we just tell them? Wouldn't users of that standing suggest an "other side" if they think there is one? I'm only afraid of a regular RfC because of editors lacking familiarity with what is a somewhat technical issue...enjoy sunrise over the bay ;-)  Tewfik Talk 03:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I would again hope that any external allegations about lack of transparency etc. would be immediately seen as ridiculous due to who the principals were, but I'm not sure what else we could do to avoid that. Any thoughts?  Tewfik Talk 17:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Let me know how I can help.  Tewfik Talk 18:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

TfD
I would suggest that the reasons for your nom at Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_July_22 are even more true of Template:Nomorelinks than of Spam-request. Would you mind extending your nomination to both, or would you prefer that I nominate the other separately? Don't want to alter your initial nom without consent - MrZaius  talk  21:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)