User talk:Zink Dawg/Archive. October 2009

On images
Hey, I see that you have had some issues with image copyright. Please note that basically you cannot upload images to Wikipedia unless you have taken them yourself and hold the copyright or they are images that have been released by a third party under a suitably free license. Images you have taken yourself does not extend to images of subjects that are themselves copyrighted such as album artwork or TV/computer screenshots. Any such images have to have a specific claim of fair use filed alongside them. If in doubt don't upload, ask first at Media Copyright Questions as we take copyright very seriously here on the project and it can be confusing. Mfield (Oi!) 03:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Surenos
I wasn't ignoring your question, I just haven't really had time to work on the Surenos article in the past couple of weeks. Niteshift36 (talk) 07:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Question
Do you think that i should stay on Wikipedia-- Zink Dawg  -- 17:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that anyone who wants to contribute should stay on Wikipedia, dude. If you have something to contribute, go for it. Just don't take other people's stuff and say it's yours, you know? That's not cool. Especailly the MS13 stuff, that could get you in a lot of hot water with someone a lot scarier than Wikipedia. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 18:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
— raeky ( talk 21:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Removing maintenance tags
Hi. You seem to be removing maintenance tags. That should only be done once the issue they are about, has been resolved, which it has not been in the few instances I noticed in my watchlist.

Please revert your removals, on any pages where you are at all uncertain whether or not the initial problem has been fixed yet. Much thanks. -- Quiddity (talk) 04:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm so sorry. I didn’t know. I will try to revert my removals, on any pages where I'm uncertain whether or not the initial problem has been fixed yet. If its ok... I may just wait and see if other users revert my removals. I did some Maintenance on Category:Articles to be split from August 2008. I Removed and Updated the split tags on 247 articles. It took me 5 hours.-- Zink Dawg  -- 05:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, yep the way to fix the backlog is not to simply remove the tags unfortunately. I have started rolling back a bunch of them and have asked for some help. They all need to be reverted, they should not be removed without an assessment of whether the article needs splitting and an appropriate message on the talkpage to that effect and to explain the decision and reasoning. Mfield (Oi!) 05:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

As someone told me, when I was new here: You're not a real Wikipedian until you've made 50 mistakes (and learned from each of them!). Have a good one. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey
I think that you will find that all of your mistaken edits have now been reverted - it's a lot quicker when you have rollback tools to use. I would gently suggest that, whilst there is a WP:BEBOLD attitude here on Wikipedia that encourages participation, if you are about to start performing a repetitive maintenance task that will involve lots of edits, it is a good idea to be certain that you are doing it correctly. Best to ask another editor to check that what you are doing is right before you accidentally create a lot of work to be undone. You can always post a tag here on your talk page and someone will respond, or post a message on the appropriate talk page. I am sure that if for example you had posted a message at Wikipedia_talk:Splitting someone would have answered you as to what the way to help out was. The community encourages participation and will tolerate good faith errors but you should make every effort to communicate with other editors. If you need any help please ask. Mfield (Oi!) 05:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Portal:Gangs move
I wanted to keep the name consistent with other portals, but I tried and the templates became redlinks. I like moving pages, not breaking them. :)

If you know how to deal with the template stuff, go ahead. --an odd name 10:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Your move worked; it's much better now. --an odd name 10:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Sadomasochism in Christianity
I'm not sure why you considered my deletion of these entries as vandalization. These clearly violate NPOV as they present one person's perspective on this topic. Examples of this person's POV include "There is something essentially sadomasochistic about the religious universe, especially the Christian one." Many, inclusing myself would strongly disagree. In fact, this entry is almost verbatim from one of Christopher Hitchen's lectures or his book "God is not Great". These entries should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.192.51.113 (talk) 02:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Copyright answers
OK, first things first. Did you take the images yourself? I.e. do you hold the copyright? Mfield (Oi!) 03:18, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I found them on photobucket inc. -- Zink Dawg  -- 03:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Then you cannot upload them. All photographs are copyrighted to the photographer unless the copyright has explicitly been transferred to a third party, or the copyright holder has released them under another license. For images to be compatible with wikipedia's licensing requirements, images need to be released under a suitably 'free' license such as Creative Commons or GFDL. In addition the license that has been chosen needs to be of a variant that permits derivative works (i.e. anyone can modify and redistribute the image) and permits commercial use of the image. You can find a lot of images that are licensed under Creative Commons on [www.flickr.com Flickr] for example, if you check the details of the CC license by clicking on the little CC logo to see what the terms are. As long as the terms do not prohibit commercial use and allow derivative works then such images could be uploaded to Wikipedia. This page details the process and licenses found on flickr that are compatible.
 * The fact that an image is visible on the internet does not mean it has been released in any way from copyright. The only exceptions on Wikipedia are fair use images, where a justification has to be made for using another parties copyrighted material. Note that images of living persons are almost impossible to justify as fair use.
 * What this all means is that if you want to upload an image that illustrates what those images do you would be best taking an alternative yourself and uploading it as own work. There are internet tools such as that can very quickly match images uploaded here to images that exist elsewhere on the internet so it is very easy for uploads that have simply been copied from elsewhere to be identified and deleted.
 * The other images you uploaded were deleted so quickly because image copyright is taken very seriously as violation of copyright has wider potential implications for the community and project as a whole. Our copyright policy is just that, it's policy rather than guidelines, and it is routinely strictly enforced due to the potential legal consequences for the project. Mfield (Oi!) 04:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help.-- Zink Dawg  -- 04:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I just uploaded File:Sunset_in_the_mountains.jpg. I found it on Flickr / look here. It had No known copyright restrictions. Did I do this right. If not, you can delete it and tell me what I did wrong.-- Zink Dawg  -- 05:48, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry but the the image was not licensed suitably. I have deleted the image. If you look at the Flickr image page under Additional Information down at the bottom right you will see ©All Rights Reserved. That means that the copyright holder retains all copyright over the image. Compatible images on Flickr do not have a copyright symbol, they have other symbols that denote the type of license as detailed in the link i left you higher up. If you visit the Flickr advanced search page at http://www.flickr.com/search/advanced/? you will see you can select an option that restricts the search to Creative Commons licensed content only. If you make sure that option is checked, and both below it "Find content to use commercially" and  "Find content to modify, adapt, or build upon" are checked too, then any images returned by the search will be compatible with Wikipedia's licensing requirements. On another note, if you do find an image on Flickr with a compatible creative commons license, then when you upload it here you need to put the image page address in as the source on the image upload page so that the original location and author of the image is recorded and the original author is attributed here. Without this the terms of the licensing are broken and the image will have to be deleted anyway. Mfield (Oi!) 06:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm trying my best to understand.
 * Can I upload this image. for example. This photo has a Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic copyright-- Zink Dawg  -- 06:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

On that last image request
Yes you can upload that last image, it has a compatible license. You should also know thta instead of uploading images locally to Wikipedia you can upload the to Wikimedia commons instead which is where all images are stored that are used on multiple language wikipedia's and projects (images uploaded here cannot be included other language wikis for example). If you register at commons you can then use the Flickr upload bot which automates the procedure of uploading and fills in all the relevant and necessary info from Flickr for you. You can register your same username to work both here and on Commons by going to Special:MergeAccount, which will register your username across all the projects so that you can use the same name everywhere. Then you can login to Commons with your same username and password. Mfield (Oi!) 07:09, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Typo
Haha, it's totally no thing bro! Nothing personal or anything. Take care! GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 17:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

LA Image
First off, you need to QUICKLY learn how you attribute media on wikimedia webspace. The image you asked me about was again likely to get deleted, you didn't attribute the author. I've corrected the license to how it actually is licensed and attributed the author. In the future you NEED to use this tool for uploading flickr images and they must also be uploaded to Commons not Wikipedia. I'm still not sure that image can stay on wikipedia alone and not be on commons, commons has bots and people that review and verify flickr licenses we don't have that here at Wikipedia. As for the image meeting FA criteria, possibly, if you reupload it to Commons with Flinfo tool I linked above. — raeky ( talk 01:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Judging by the upload instructions here at wikipedia for flickr (Upload/Flickr) it directs you to upload the image at Commons. I'll move this image to commons, but for future reference use tools like Flinfo to upload flickr images to commons NOT here. — raeky ( talk 01:41, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You need to fix your deletion tag on my photo.
 * Also, I was told by a administrator, That It was OK to upload images on here from flickr.-- Zink Dawg  -- 02:25, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've moved it to commons: see here. It is preferred free images go on Commons and only "fair use" images uploaded to the respective project pages. Images on commons can be used across all the wikimedia projects. The deletion tag is a formality just indicating the location of the media has moved to Commons. Read the comments I put on your user page, you was in error uploading it here and how you uploaded it. — raeky ( talk 02:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed your deletion tag on my photo. Thank you for your help. I will set up a user name on Wikimedia Commons.-- Zink Dawg  -- 02:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You don't need to create an account just go to this page Special:MergeAccount and your login here will automatically be copied to the other projects and will magically work at Commons too. — raeky ( talk 02:39, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Done... See Special:MergeAccount-- Zink Dawg  -- 03:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikimedia Commons is way better for uploding images. Its allot easier to understand. Thank you for your help.-- Zink Dawg  -- 03:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * See, File:Venice, California Beach.jpg. Did I do it right. Please tell me.-- Zink Dawg  -- 04:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks right, except always download the LARGEST (original) photo you can and upload, you seem to be uploading small versions. — raeky ( talk 04:29, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. — raeky ( talk 02:30, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
— raeky ( talk 02:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Los Angeles, CA from the air.jpg
File:Los Angeles, CA from the air.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Los Angeles, CA from the air.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

See....
J.delanoy's Talk Page and WIKI:AIAV --GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 22:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks.-- Zink Dawg  -- 00:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Jefferson page move
I undid your move of William J. Jefferson to William J. Jefferson (corruption investigation). I think there should be an article about him, and that's not his name :-) Really, page moves (except to correct obvious typos or mistakes) (and especially when the page has a long history at a title and many Wikimedia links) should be proposed and discussed on talk pages before making unilateral moves; please discuss on Talk:William J. Jefferson first if you think the article about him should be retitled. Thanks. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 00:46, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing!  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 19:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback may be removed at any time.

Per Request

 * Wikipedia's list of policies
 * Administrators' reading list

Cheers, Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 15:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you.-- Zink Dawg  -- 15:45, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry
I am sorry that I was an ass to you on this site. Sorry for vandalizing your pages, and making death threats. I just do not like Sureños. It was quite rude of me. I will not do it again. Thanks for your time, and please do not see this apology as vandalism.--72.13.91.132 (talk) 18:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: User_talk:Tohd8BohaithuGh1
It was a mistake - pressed the revert button on the first (blanking out edit) edit too quickly, before I noticed that you had reverted it already. Sorry. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t &bull; c &bull; r) 00:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

AIV
Please can you explain this edit and the edit summary you gave with it? ➜ Redvers talk ❝It's bona to vada your dolly old eek❞  18:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, The Ip has been on there for over a hour. Also, They have not edited since 10:48 and the user has been incorrectly or insufficiently warned. I was just trying to help out in cleaning up the back log.-- Zink Dawg  -- 19:03, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you could avoid removing entries in general, that would be better (by all means comment on them). If you could avoid removing them and using bot-like edit summaries at the same time, it would be even better still. Thanks. ➜ Redvers talk ❝It's bona to vada your dolly old eek❞  19:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Your "friends"...
J.delanoy <sup style="color:red;">gabs <sub style="color:blue;">adds 01:03, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for blocking them. Can you changed the protection level on my talk page. I think It needs to be protected for one to two weeks. Also, Can you semi-protect User:Zink Dawg/Location, Thank you,-- Zink Dawg  -- 01:36, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to do so for you if vandalism starts up again, but can you set up a page where good-faith IPs can contact you while your page is semi-protected? Thanks, <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 03:55, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I see that wean I was away from my computer, they're still was vandalism on my talk page. I am getting tired of this. If the vandalism starts up again and my talk page is semi-protected. I will create User talk:Zink Dawg/talk page. - Zink Dawg  -- 16:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Your page has been . <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 20:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for doing that for me. I put the { { pp-vandalism } } back on my talk page.  Zink Dawg  -- 21:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)