User talk:Zscout370/Archive 7

Immaculate Heart of Mary Seminary
Hi Zach, User:Bolanon would like to upload the IHMS Hymn to the article. He is asking for help with conversion from mp3 to ogg. He will be sending you the mp3, I will also send you my copy for backup. Please help. I explained in email the notability aspect. There are also no problems with copyrights...--Pinay06 (Talk•Email) 02:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll convert it now, I got that email. I will send him the OGG file and he can upload it with the relevant copyright information. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Maraming salamat!!!Malaki na utang namin sa 'yo...--Pinay06 (Talk•Email) 02:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Email sent to you, including instructions for the email you mentioned. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Season's greetings
Merry Christmas!!! The real meaning of Christmas is thisand this. Also enjoy this and this --Pinay06 (Talk•Email) 04:58, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Pointed your way
Hello. While asking a question about a flag issue, I was given your name as the Wikipedia flag expert. I was working on the Gallery of confusable flags and found that the flag of the Comoros from 1975-1978 didn't exist in the Commons like all the other flags. The only already-produced image I could find in my admittedly cursor search was one on a site that gave permission for non-commercial use (a no-no for Wikipedia, as I quickly found out). Since it was a relatively easy design I used autoshape in Powerpoint to manufacture my own gif, but I understand that there are special legal rules regarding copyrighted flags, to the effect that a self-manufactured version of a flag is not necessarily looked upon as the work of the person who manufactured it. Can you give me any help, whether it be peace of mind that my version is legal, or (much more unlikely) point me towards the copyright holder of the Comoran flag from 1975...  I appreciate any help you might be able to give, and I'm just happy to talk to a flag expert at all.

v/r, Hammon27 05:41, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I can make an SVG graphic of it tomorrow, since it would be easy to do. I personally believe the copyright holder of the flag image I could contact easily, but from my experience in talking to my other flag buddies at FOTW, they do not want their images to be used commercially. I hope this helps. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 11:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Made the SVG graphic, but I just need to upload it tomorrow. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 11:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Article Rewards
What are those, out of curiosity?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 13:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Think of it as a bounty, except instead of Wikimedia getting the cash, I get it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I think I heard about it. A controversial proposal, although the one I support. Where is it discussed?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Reward board. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I saw. All I can say is good luck, and for obvious reasons I will keep away :) Renata 23:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you and I just hope I did not let you or Lithuanian Wikipedians down. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Nope, I really don't think so. The article looks way better :) I just don't have time (or brainpower) to get involved... BTW, could you send me an email? My username + gmail.com? Renata 06:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Email sent. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Turkmenistan
Zach, you did beautiful work on that recreation of the round arms. I have added material from the Spanish Wikipedia, hope it meets your approval. They apparently got it from http://www.turkmenistanembassy.org/turkmen/history/emblem.html, which I have also sourced, then went to it. It's kind of good that I translated it from the Spanish, which they translated from English, so it reads similar but is not in any way a copyvio.

Say, I have been admiring your Belarus graphics, you're one of the most skilled graphics guys I have seen, do you take requests? You've helped out on several Scouting articles, most have good graphics, some in particular could use your handiwork.

You have a merry Christmas, brother. Chris 06:56, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the Christmas greetings, I wish for the same to you. As for the Turkmenistan article, it looks good. I found the round arms strange, but I should have looked first before I shot my mouth off. As for requests, tell me what you need and I can make it happen. Might take a few days, but it can be done. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 09:33, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Image help
A short while back you helped me with a user who was upset about me removing a fair use image from his user page. I was wondering if I could get your opinion again. uploaded Image:VitorRibeiroTelles-n-Quiver.jpg this photo as a copyrighted image. In this thread, Talk:Bloodless bullfighting, the photographer said he releases all rights of the photos he takes to Pebs96 as she operates the company/website he takes the photos for. Now Pebs96 has specified on the photo's summary page that the photos can only be used in particular articles of her desire. She has added it to the 3 pages specified in her summary. It has since been removed from two of the articles as non-fair use (one was to demonstrate the color of horses and the other a breed of horse), but it remains in the article on the subject of the photo. However, she's also added it to her own user page as well. There's been a lot of history between me and Pebs96, so I know if I remove it from her user page, she'll get pretty upset with me since she'll say that she can do that since it's her own copyright.

Is there any chance you could take a bit to look into this? I'd appreciate it, Metros232 17:49, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
 * So this user is the creator of the image she uploaded. There is plenty of things she did incorrectly. First off, she didn't see this "If you upload a file here to which you hold the copyright, you must license it under a free license or release it into the public domain." She is not allowed to upload it as fair use at all, since she created the images. Second, she cannot dictate where the photos are being used at all. Third, I believe there are free photos we can find on flickr of these horses, so these fair use photos can be removed in a few days. I am going to remove the fair use photos from her userpage now. If she has any problems, have her come to my userpage and point her to this discussion. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:17, 25 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Those photos are not only just mine, but we own the horses as well. And no, you won't find these particular horses on Flickr either.... I just checked and I don't upload my photos on Flickr because we have our own dedicated website for them.  I described "where" these photos are going in on the photo page because the "Fair Use 3" allows it to be used on "3" articles.  I really don't understand why Metros232 is causing so much trouble and is "picking" on "everything" that I do.  I know that I can have photos that I've uploaded on my "user page", because I've seen everyone else do it themselves.  There are some that even have a section, just like me with ALL of the photos that they've uploaded.  And for example, the Firefox logo is a "Fair Use" item, but it is also on people's userpages as well.  It seems that "conveniently" these rules only apply to me because Metros232 wants so badly to make problems when I've done nothing wrong.  I've tagged the images accordingly to what the policy states and it says that it MUST have a tag on it, and explain why it is being used.  I've done exactly just that.  Thanks--Webmistress Diva 00:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If you created the content yourself, there are three licenses you have to use. They include the Creative Commons, GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) or the public domain. It says on the upload page that if you made the content yourself, you cannot have it under fair use. Even if you wanted to, policy forbids that, so it would be better for you to not upload them in the first place if you didn't like the license choices you were offered (if you looked at them). If the photographer, which you hired, released the photos to Wikipedia, he needs to play email tag with permissions@wikimedia.org so he and Wikipedia can sort out the license that he wants to use. I dealt with the firefox logo issue before, but every time I tried to explain the situation to them, as I am to you now, I get shot down. I have not heard about the number of pages you are allowed to upload before it is not considered fair use, but with our current policies, fair use photos cannot be used on the userpage. If your wondering how you can show what pictues you uploaded, I would suggest to link your contributions to your userpage (which is interestly designed, I might add) so people can pick "Upload log" and it will show all of your uploads. That is legal to do. Honestly, Pebes, this is not the first user I had to explain this too, and Metros dealt with other users before about the fair use issue. The only reason why he is here is that if he needed someone to explain this better, I can. I deal with some of the copyright issues on Wikipedia, an as administrator, I enforce them. Please, what I suggest now is to not upload the photos again, and if you do, please use the licenses that I suggested or have the photographer contact the email address I provided. I hope this answers all of your questions. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I looked at the Commons where the firefox logo is hosted and it was created with a free license, though I know it violates the Firefox logo guidelines. It was brought up for deletion before but was kept. I tried to use other foxes before, but was shot down by the userbox people (which I do not like much). You're not the first person, nor the last, to either misunderstand our policies on fair use or I had to enforce this policy by deletion. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your efforts, but I will have to continue this discussion at a later time... it's Christmas and I'd like to have a day without Wikipedia issues. Happy Holidays!--Webmistress Diva 04:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. As long as you take my advice, things will be fine. However, I do apologize for knocking out some of the extra code in your userpage. Happy holidays to you too. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:56, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Am I glad to be back?
Hi! This is the first thing that greeted me on my talk page today. How was your holidays?--Pinay06 (Talk•Email) 00:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It was good; dad called from that giant sandbox and everything is calm. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Good to hear that. I take it you had fun, after the good news. Thank you for taking care of part of my watchlist...Well, I'm off to rack some edits. Talk to you later...--Pinay06 (Talk•Email) 01:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

alberta1907
Go right ahead! -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Toasted :) User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Flag of the Governor of Anguilla.svg
Hi Zscout370

Would you upload this picture into Wikimedia Commons please?

--89.59.208.142 11:25, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Done, Commons:Image:Flag of the Governor of Anguilla.svg. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 11:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much :)  --89.59.198.116 14:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

User:IAF
User:IAF does not find wrong in use of "Indian Air Force" as his signature. Will some admin pl. cite proper policy on his talk page and do the needful. swadhyayee 11:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Took discussion to IAF's talkpage. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:56, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Maples
That's some pretty solid motivation. Go the history tab for the article and find the users who have invested the most time in the article. I will help you as much as possible after you've developed the article a bit more by adding ecology, distribution and similar information. KP Botany 20:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright. I will try and get started as soon as I can on it and thanks for what you done so far. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Carlos P. Garcia
Hey Zach. I take it the flag of Bohol is okey in the article since it is still there? Just checking. Oh, you know you can be blunt with me. Please let me know if it is appropriate or not and it will be removed. Thank you for all the help. --Pinay (talk•email) 00:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The editor who removed it pretty much wanted context, which you gave. Everything is fine now. (BTW, how does the Coat of Arms image look now)? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Okey. Maybe i was more upset with the grammar than anything else. hehehe. Anyway, please give me the link to CoA coz i am still "low IQ" about it. Oh, and i am still waiting for your feedback on the other article --Pinay (talk•email) 01:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Image:Coat of Arms of the Philippines.svg is the arms image, I am looking at the article you mentioned now. Unless it had major changes in the past few days, the article is pretty good, though I am not quite sure if there are any photos we could use (I would suggest using flickr). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I love it! It's really good! You have the gift. Thank you for putting it to such good use! --Pinay  (talk•email) 02:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * About the article, focus on the citation/s --Pinay  (talk•email) 02:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The sourcing sytle is fine, and I liked on how each awardee was cited. That is pretty much going on the right track. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

IHMS Song
BTW, how do you attach the song to the article to make the song play on beta? --Pinay (talk•email) 02:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Take the code I used at My Belarusy and put in the information you want it to say. Then it will get included in the Beta Player. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I am still looking at where the problem with User:Bolanon's upload went wrong. The source file he gave is http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b3/IHMS_WLY.ogg which is not found...What do you think is wrong?--Pinay (talk•email) 03:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It was deleted. What happened is that Bolanon got a license where it could be used on Wikipedia only. I should have explained to Bolanon that the license that the school gives us must allow the recording to do the following: Be used by others, be able to be used commercially and be abled to be modified. Have Bolanon secure that, then I will review the situation. If not, I am not able to restore the file. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Okey. Thanks for the help. I will work on your suggestions...--Pinay (talk•email) 04:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Zach, I didn't know what to choose for the licensing. Although the composer gave me full authority to release it to the public. Would this licensing type be sufficient: "Copyright holder has granted use for 'any' purpose including commercial. Must be justified in Permission!" ? I can upload it again to the commons site. Bolanon 22:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Bolanon, your getting pretty close, but am I able to talk to the person myself and confirm this, please? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Zach, I posted Bolanon's message here coz he just had it in his talkpage. I have forwarded the emails to you. Let me know what else we can do. --Pinay (talk•email) 05:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I got some of your emails, but go ahead and forward the emails Bolanon got so I can look at them. I will contact them myself too, after I read the emails, since I think I need to be more clearer to the folks at IHMS. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Sent you their email addresses and U.S. phone numbers thru email. --Pinay (talk•email) 06:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Email sent to one of the officials. You should get a copy of the email, which is an example of what permission letters could include. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

help needed on 2 things
Hi Zach, I think your help/intervention is needed with the images edit wars at Jose Rizal and the image change at Carlos P. Garcia. --Pinay (talk•email) 17:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll comment about Rizal later. The "image war" ar Garcia's article was started by me. I removed the previous photo because I looked at the page and it has no website source and just slapped with a fair use template. There is already a sourced image, of a small size, that fits well with the article. I suggest to you and the rest of WP:PINOY that they should begin to start sourcing their images, because if I found out that we can keep the photos, we need a source. And if the images have no sources, I have to bring out the axe and take the photos down. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Got it loud and clear.--Pinay (talk•email) 19:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Lupang Hinirang
Hi Zach, the Lupang Hinirang Nox will be sending you when he has a better internet connection today is in WMA format. Can you use it? --Pinay (talk•email) 00:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Nox emailed me about the situation. Yes, I can use WMA and convert it to OGG. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Okey. Then it must be coming...--Pinay (talk•email) 01:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have MSN Messenger on, so I will know exactly when I get the email, because I hear the messenger "ping" and shows me who sent me the email. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Good for you. There are problems with the internet connection in P.I. coz of cable problems after the Taiwan earthquake ...--Pinay (talk•email) 01:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * We have some users from Singapore come into the Wikipedia IRC channel last night telling us the issues. I also had a hard time opening the Japanese and Korean Wikipedias, so I know about the situation. Wikipedia also knows, so lets just hope for the best (plus, if you want to ping me on the messengers, let me know too privately). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:43, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I wonder if their issues are incorporated here as well. --Pinay (talk•email) 02:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes it is. A notice was also pasted on the Main Page for a little bit. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * WT:PINOY is planning to incorporate the Philippine situation in the article as well...--Pinay (talk•email) 02:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Permission for IHMS Song
Forwarded email permission. Also advised to send you email for permission. Is there need to re-upload? or just undo the delete? Nox/Bolanon will not be able to do it with the internet connection situation he has...--Pinay (talk•email) 02:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Got the email. Saw the song in the article. It will be their pride and joy for it to be there. You would not know how grateful the Bohol clergy all over the world will be to you!!! Count on their blessings. --Pinay (talk•email) 03:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * What I am doing now is once I get his reply, I will forward that to the OTRS of Wikipedia so it can be archived. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Okey. Let me know if there is still anything I can do. No signs on Lupang Hinirang yet? --Pinay (talk•email) 03:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, how should his reply be like? --Pinay (talk•email) 03:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I got the agreement and sent it to OTRS. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Okey. BTW, I just learned that the IHMS song won during the 2000 IHMS Golden Jubilee Celebration among several entries from alumni all over the world...Is that notable to mention in the article? or just leave how it is as is. --Pinay (talk•email) 19:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and add it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Untagged image
An image you uploaded, Image:Ratzinger coa.jpg, was tagged with the coatofarms copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as seal. If you have any questions, ask them at Media copyright questions. -- 23:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Deleted. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Untagged image
An image you uploaded, Image:Nishan-e-Haider.jpg, was tagged with the coatofarms copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as seal. If you have any questions, ask them at Media copyright questions. -- 00:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Deleted. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Touching base
Heya, Zscout. Just ran across you on some random page, and realized I haven't worked with you in quite some time. I've been pretty busy with real-life stuff, but on my spare time I now function as the coordinator of the Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject. We're making some really amazing progress, mostly due to a few amazingly dedicated editors (of which, I'm ashamed to say, I cannot count myself lately). How have things been on your end lately? – ClockworkSoul 17:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Just making more FA's, graphics and that is about it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Lithuania FA
Ok, done :) Congrats, happy New Year, and would you mind scheduling some date for apperance on the Main page? That'd be awesome! Thanks a ton. Renata 04:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Unless you have a specific date in mind, I usually do not schedule a date for it to come on the Main Page. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Latvijas_lielais_gerbonis.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Latvijas_lielais_gerbonis.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Fixed, PD according to . User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

CAIO A-TEENS
Hello why did you blok my pictures? I have a big work for make this ... and you block ... why? send me a e-mail
 * I got your email, replied there. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Getting rid of a test wiki entry altogether
I made a test wiki entry which earned a Speedy Deletion categorization. I unknowingly resurrected the page and it's protected now. I agree it should be deleted but it remains in the wiki. How can I get rid of it altogether so it doesn't keep hanging around?
 * Tell me what the page is called and I could perform the deletion for you. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I deleted the talk page, but I cannot delete the main article just quite yet. Give it a few months and it could be deleted, though I am not sure how that completely works. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:47, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.

Arroyo photo
Great! I'll see where this will be most useful! HAPPY NEW YEAR! --Pinay (talk•email) 01:02, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Happy New Year to you too. I am currently looking through the databank of the Kremlin to see what else is there. The other thing I found was GMA, along with many others, wearing traditional Vietnamese outfits. I am not sure how that will be put in, unless there is a section about diplomacy with others. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Those were really nice pictures! Thank you for being on the lookout for us. I posted your msg in WT:PINOY. They will surely be put to good use. I also uploaded some good ones from US DoD in commonshere. --Pinay (talk•email) 01:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * At least these can go into the Commons too if they have no use on EN. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Surely, they will be used. You will see. --Pinay (talk•email) 01:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

posted in WT:PINOY
A message was posted there by Kevin Ray asking for help with this! I am not sure why the departments refer to U.S. instead of Philippines. Can you help check? --Pinay (talk•email) 02:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No bots edited it, so maybe what happened is someone took this from the US Portal and just didn't change them at all. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed all US entries from the page, feel free to add the PH items back in. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Greetings!
--Pinay (talk•email) 02:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC)



naming conventions
Is it needed at WP:PINOY? If so, how is it done? --Pinay (talk•email) 04:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hellenic Air Force Roundel.svg
Hi, could you upload this image to Wikipedia Commons please? Zz99 12:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Give me several hours; I'm at a place where the Internet connection is spotty, at best. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 13:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry to trouble you. I found another variant on commons - "Grecja-roundel.svg". However I would like to ask you for Roundel of the Philippines Air Force.svg instead, if thats ok Zz99 13:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I can still upload both, I just need to get somewhere that I can get a better internet connection. Wikipedia doesn't load for me half of the time. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 13:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! No hurry. Zz99 14:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I uploaded the second photo. I am still debating about the Greece roundel image. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for uploading it! Zz99 12:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you pls help
Can you look into this link below (as you've already had an idea about the issue) and help resolve it? Thanks ­ Kris (talk) 18:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive68
 * I am going to get some more eyeballs to look at this, because it seems that what I am doing in ineffective. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

About your deletion of Image:Hussein hangs.jpg
The reason for deletion was: "blatent copyright violation from http://news.yahoo.com/photo/061230/ids_photos_wl/r2543073752.jpg", however I wonder why this image does not falls under fair use criteria of a not replaceable TV screenshot of a significant historical event? --WinHunter (talk) 23:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The image came from Reuters, who forbids commercial use of their images. Plus since the image came out less than 3 days ago, the agency, among others, are selling the photograph to other agencies. By us having it, we will fail in the 4th requirement for the image to be fair use. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well I have to say that first of all Reuters does not own copyright because it's a screenshot from the iraqi tv, so the iraqi station own the copyright, thought that's irrelevant at this point because the image is used under fair use, which "permit the use of copyrighted material on Wikipedia under a restricted set of criteria" when the content is not freely available. An example to this use of copyrighted material is Image:New York Times 9-11.jpg, which shows the newspaper headline (copyrighted content) of a important historic event under fair use. --WinHunter (talk) 04:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * When I checked the image, it was being sold by Iraq TV to Reuters and the AP, and all three well selling the image. We still cannot use it yet. They are still selling the image. Give it about 6 months and I will have no objections. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Another hint, someone uploaded a copy of the photo to the Wikimedia Commons. We cannot host fair use on the Commons at all, so even if down the road that we can use the Saddam hanging photo, we cannot have it on the Commons. What will most likely happen is after a few weeks, when the newsworthyness of the photo is gone, I will restore it. It has the source info, we have image undeletion, so give me about 5 weeks and I will restore it. Agreed? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, that's fine with me. --WinHunter (talk) 11:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Please speedily undelete my user-subpage
Please immediately undelete my user-subpage that you "out of process" speedily deleted at 03:44 this morning. I can see no proper basis for you deleting my user-subpage; it did not contain the image in question and was simply a record of the copyright justification prior to deletion so I could sleep on the matter before deciding if I wanted to take the issue further. The process for requesting a user page deletion is described at User_page. Rwendland 18:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Restored, sorry about that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Good. Do you also accept that as [[Image:Hussein hangs.jpg]] had both a fair-use template and a Fair Use Rationale section, and that User:Rory096 had commenced the IfD process, you were wrong to speedily delete that image, and the proper thing to do would have been to let the IfD process run? (I do have sympathy with your argument that Reuters could be marketing the image so fair-use was invalid - but that argument should have been made in the IfD discussion.) I struggle to think of a reason for you to delete my user-subpage other than to remove evidence regarding your speedy delete of [[Image:Hussein hangs.jpg]] - please explain.  Rwendland 09:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines
Err.. why are you reverting edits by User:Of? It looks like he's just archiving old discussions to Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive07. TheCoffee 04:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I see it now, it would be helpful that he is saying "I am archiving this" instead of just blanking the page without any comment. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks... TheCoffee 04:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I also replied to OF's email, so he should be unblocked by now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

What is your reason and authority for indefinitely blocking User:Nkras?
i see no discussion of this at ArbCom or ANI or anywhere. what gives you that authority? there is something very sinister going on here and ArcCom will be hearing about it soon. r b-j 05:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The administrators have the ability to block people for any length of time. Your friend, Nkras, was reposting content that was previously deleted under our policies. After being told not told, he did so anyways and promised to keep doing it. Because of his intent to disrupt Wikipedia, I had no choice to block him indefinitely. Plus, indefinite blocks do not have to first discussed on ANI or ArbCom. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * he is not my friend even though he "thanked" me for comments i put on his talk page and i agree with him only marginally (almost not at all) on content regarding the article Marriage. i cannot find any discussion of the degree of abuse except on his talk page and that is thin.  i dunno where you come from but this indefinite block is playing right into the hands of his content opponents and this is, in effect, a block because of content dispute.
 * i am no neophyte here, and unless you do the right thing here, Fred Bauder and other ArbCommissioners are going to hear about this. this is systemic bias at it's ugliest. r b-j 05:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I am inclined not to lift the block. He was warned plenty of times. Also, read my comment in the next section about the details of the block. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Lupang Hinirang
I 4got to check with you if you got the wma file. --Pinay (talk•email) 00:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Just caught me eating dinner, so I will check in a few minutes. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * O, I thought of it being sent last Friday. No? maybe today, if Nox gets the chance to go on-line. First day back to work after the holidays...--Pinay (talk•email) 01:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope, didn't get it yet. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey. Forwarded Nox email to you just now. Pls check and msg me when you get it. Thanks. --Pinay (talk•email) 00:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Nkras' block
Although theatrical language like "something sinister going on" is of course out of place, I also support a review of the indefinite block on User:Nkras. After his initial clumsy behavior at Talk:Marriage, he de-escalated the situation himself and participated in the successful, collegial revision of the article's opening. I believe the attempted recreation of Traditional marriage was also in good faith, as this was discussed   during the afd.

Dan B † Dan  D  05:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that he was asked to not do it, yet he still did. The one that caused the indefinite block was the following message when he decided to recreate the article at Marriage (traditional): "18:42, 3 January 2007 . . Nkras (Talk | contribs | block) (Creation of Marriage (traditional). Deletion of this article without discussion, even by Admins, will be considered prima facie POV.)" If something was deleted because of AFD, then he should have gone to Deletion review, not recreate the article across Wikipedia under several names. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * and he'll learn. a 24 or 48 hour block might have sent a message, but the indefinite block says that "Nkras cannot get the message so why try?"  the indefiniteness of the block is disproportionate and just wrong.  i'm too tired to file a RFA now (01:13 hours EST), but i hope you will save us all a lot of time and headache and fix this before i get the energy to act on this. r b-j 06:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As I said above, I am not going to lift the block. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I was also someone on the opposite side of the fence from Nkras on most issues, but I still am shocked that he was blocked indefinitely, and think it was a gross overreaction. I would hope that this decision will be reversed, as Nkras, while being somewhat problematic at the beginning of his editing here, was a major force in resolving the conflict on the Marriage article. If he is unblocked, I will be the first to welcome him back. We had strong differences of opinion, but he certainly had my respect for his ability to compromise in order to achieve consensus. Jeffpw 09:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I further think that protecting the Tradiditonal Marriage pages is heavy handed, to say the least. Several people, myself included, said that the topic itself was certainly worthy of an article, just not the article that was copied from Marriage itself. Now anyone who wants to write about the development of the term as used for political purposes is blocked from writing it. Jeffpw 09:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I had no hand in the protection, that would have to be discussed with the protecting admin, who is on vacation. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, you have made your position clear about your block of Nikras, so I shall, as well. I find it to be heavy handed, and entirely disproportionate to his transgression. I further find it troubling that you and other admins block users without explaining to them (many of whom are new or relatively new) what their options are in the situation. I once again request you unblock him. I also plan on submitting this to WP:AN and WP:ANI. Jeffpw 21:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I won't unblock. The only options that this user really has is to convince me that he needs an unblock. He can do that via email, which is listed at my userpage on MetaWiki (see the link on my userpage). Other than that, his options are slim. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * One more thing, he can still post at his talk page. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Execution of Saddam
http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/01/01/wld02.asp hi Saddam died at 6:10, this guy kept on reverting and making things wrong... Iraq official death certificate is 6:10, died 6:05... http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/01/01/wld02.asp. Also that guy removed saddam's link to his last hours, all those should go back. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_hussein You should block this guy who kept on reversing everything. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Execution_of_Saddam_Hussein&diff=98515213&oldid=98514518 is best version, see what can be done asap. you can go on talk page yourself and waste time.
 * I am not going get involved with that. Take your battle elsewhere. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

So who the h... made you administrator, you seem a hypocrite, you just did something over there with some page photo.
 * All I did was I removed the photos from the articles for being copyright violations. I have no interest in finding out what time did he die. There is a post at WP:AN and on the talk page of Saddam's article. There is nothing much I can add and I won't be any use at those pages. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Immaculate Heart of Mary Seminary
Zach, please check if the stub can now be removed from the article. Also, the source for the IHMS song is already in the file. Please check so we can make the necessary correction. (BTW, let me know if you got the email re Lupang Hinirang). --Pinay (talk•email) 01:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Removing stub tags now. Email received. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As for the song of the IHMS, was it emailed to you guys or did you download it somewhere? Regardless, list it on the page of the file. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The composer, Fr. Roland Pacudan, also posted it here Pls check if that is okey.--Pinay (talk•email) 04:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Re the Lupang Hinirang, I just listened to the wma file now, I did not know it was so "scratchy" or noisy. Why? old age? LoL! You've managed to lessen the noise? Is it better? --Pinay  (talk•email) 04:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Arbeit Macht Frei, offensive imagery: User:EvilAlex
This image is deeply offensive to me and to many others. The persistent upload and re-creation of this image, now under a new name, has been done to circumvent a prevented protection and block of same. It is now renamed "Welcome3.gif" I have already told the author that I find it deeply offensive. He has also been warned by a total of 3 admins so far. He has been told that if he keeps uploading it, he will be blocked without further warning. The warning was: "If you do one more such edit you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia." I ask that you please block him now and please delete this image for the last and final time. He has been given a lot of warnings and the image has been deleted many times before, but he keeps flouting the rules. - Mauco 03:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Blocked for 48 hours. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

request for arbitration.
arbitration has been requested for a dispute that you are or may be involved in. please see Requests for arbitration r b-j 04:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

About your removal of the fair use photo on Execution of Saddam Hussein
You deleted the image, but to me it seems like a fair use image according to WP:FAIR, under the overview of
 * "critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." - Yeah, it does that.
 * the execution is as notorious the "Muhammad cartoons newspaper scan", being the subject of worldwide discussion. Basically, it's not replacable with a free alternative and contains analysis and commentary.

It also fits the policy as:
 * No free equivilent exists
 * Won't replace the original market, since it's only a screenshot
 * It was low-resolution
 * It has been previously published
 * It is encyclopaedic
 * Meets the media-specific requirements
 * Was used in an article
 * Contributes significantly to the article (adds /A LOT/ to it)
 * Used in article namespace
 * Contained proper attribution

If you disagree (which I have a feeling you might), could you advise as to where to go to get a second opinion? I think it's an iconic, important, informative image that should to be placed on the page -Halo 08:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The reason why I deleted the image is that the image is fairly recent and is being sold by Iraq TV, Reuters and the AP. Under the fair use laws of the US, we cannot have the photo yet because the news agencies are still selling the photo. We are hurting the market value of the photo and we cannot host it because of it. As I told others, give us about 4 weeks and I can have the original Saddam hanging video restored. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 11:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Whaaaaaaaaaaat??!!
You have more than 20,000 edits. =D Nothing I was just aghast. =)) Berserkerz Crit 10:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Week
The best existing proposal I can, in my own limited way, think of for the previously discussed "appreciation week" can now be found at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week. Any comments or responses would be more than welcome. Badbilltucker 15:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Paring Bol-anon
Hi! I placed the template US interactive map on the Paring Bol-anon USA section. Will you please check if that is all right and/or move to a best position? Thank you...--Pinay (talk•email) 22:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The location is fine. I am going to email you the OGG file we discussed earlier now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Got the email! BTW, What is the best player to play ogg? --Pinay (talk•email) 23:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I use Winamp (to get the OGG codec version, you need to go to the Winamp website and click the player to download. Click "get basic" then click "full." User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Will do...--Pinay (talk•email) 00:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Download successfully done! Thank you for the step-by-step process. I am using it now. --Pinay (talk•email) 02:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Saddam timing is important, what do you mean by immaculate heart of mary?Is that part of rosary?
 * Er, what is this about? the seminary?--Pinay (talk•email) 00:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Pinay, ignore the last banter. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI
Just wondering if you've read this.--Pinay (talk•email) 06:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * O, and this is a version of the UP Concert Chorus. --Pinay (talk•email) 06:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As for the blog, yes I read it before. I left comments on it before. I seen the soundclick page before, but haven't gotten anything from them yet. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

seals
Hi! when you get slack time, do you think you can improve the seals of the Diocese of Tagbilaran and the Diocese of Talibon? Let me know...Thanks. --Pinay (talk•email) 18:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Nkras
Just letting you know that I decided to try unblocking him. See User talk:Nkras. Basically I feel that, it's worth given him a second chance. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine. I will keep watch, but won't do any more blockings. I still believe that my original blocking should be a wake-up call for Nkras and that he knows that he has the community watching him. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Images with permission
"these images are speedy deleted by order of Jimbo Wales since May of 2005"


 * Can you provide a pointer to this order and the rationale for it? If we have permission to use an image, we can use the image.  Seems pretty clear to me. — Omegatron 04:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The Order can be read at (which is linked on my userpage too). I do not know why he personally did this decision, I cannot peer into his mind and find out why. What I, and Jimbo, meant by "by permission only" images is that Wikipedia, and only Wikipedia, can use the content. Wikipedia's content is copied by various websites, including images. That would put mirrors into a bind, plus, if we want to make a Wikipedia DVD, we can't use those images. I hope this helps. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 10:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not know why he personally did this decision, I cannot peer into his mind and find out why.
 * He doesn't seem to give any rationale, either, and the rest of that thread seems to only be about a specific website...

What I, and Jimbo, meant by "by permission only" images is that Wikipedia, and only Wikipedia, can use the content.
 * Yes.

''Wikipedia's content is copied by various websites, including images. That would put mirrors into a bind''
 * If they're clearly marked as copyrighted with Wikipedia-only permission, and another site copies them anyway, that's not really our problem. There are other things in the Image: namespace that can't be legally copied, either, like our logos.  Of course we should make it as easy as possible for mirrors to differentiate between content which is under the GFDL (articles) and other licenses (all of the various image licenses), like we do with image tags, but I don't see why that should result in blanket removal of useful images for which we have the blessing of the copyright holder on our specific site.

plus, if we want to make a Wikipedia DVD, we can't use those images.
 * So don't include them. :-)
 * Gregory Maxwell points out a little rationale:
 * Wikipedia has grown past the point where we need to rely on grey legality images, and preserving them only discourages people who would submit free ones in their place.
 * And sure, if a Wikipedian can take a picture of a houseplant and copyleft it, we should use theirs instead of a grey legality image of a houseplant. But "with permission" images are not grey in legality.  We have permission.  We should use it.  There are uncountable images of objects and events that will never be copyleft (copyright exists for a reason, after all...), but for which the copyright holder would gladly give us permission.  Blanket prohibition of these unreproducable images would seem to conflict with our goal of creating an encyclopedia of the "highest possible quality". — Omegatron 22:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Even though we, Wikipedia, got the permission to use the images, the Board decided that these images are not free enough. A similar decision was made about images that couldn't be modified (not mentioned in this letter, but mentioned months later). While some of the photos we got permission for a good, the decision is out of my hands and the only one who can change the policy now is Jimbo Wales himself. I cannot speak for him, but IMHO, I do not think this is a decision that Jimbo will reverse. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * the Board decided that these images are not free enough
 * ...free enough for what? Do you have a reference to this decision? — Omegatron 03:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That I do not have. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

feedback needed
Hi! please feedback re SPOT LP and Divine Word Seminary video. Details in separate emails. --Pinay (talk•email) 20:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I got the emails, but I need some time to peer over them. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Did you like the video presentation? --Pinay (talk•email) 00:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Looking at it tonight. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Russia
Thanks for your help offer. I wanted to create the three flags mentioned on the FOTW site as the "oldest" ones in the XVII century book, rather than linking to them on FOTW space. Beyond that, there are many flag variants that have been used in Russia in its history, most of them (the better documented ones, at least) after the tricolour, but some before. Perhaps I can research some of those and add them to the article. IgorSF 05:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That will be perfectly fine. I went ahead and created the Флаг МЧС России (представительский) using Inkscape. You mention the flags that were part of Russia's history from FOTW, but just cannot use the artwork from there. Sure, we can document the variants, but I do not think we need graphics for them. However, I will want to discuss the variant of the Russian flag I see today: the tricolor charged with the Coat of Arms (including shield). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, IMO in a subject concerning such a visual issue as a flag, the more images the better; if these images exist on the FOTW site, we'll only win by having them here as well. They are already documented in the article, by the way; but that's for future, when myself or someone else has the time to do a more throughout study of Russian flag variants and history. IgorSF 09:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As for the variant you mentioned, did you mean the President's Штандарт by chance? It's certainly a good candidate for inclusion in the article, and may even be available as a public domain item. IgorSF 09:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm two steps ahead of you. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 10:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, claiming advantage is unlikely, since I wasn't going to create the image, but merely answering what I assumed to be your question ;) On a serious note, thanks for creating the image! IgorSF 10:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 10:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * One more thing, we can add information about the standard. What I was thinking was making a section in the article similiar to what I have at Flag of Belarus. The section will discuss Russian based flags that are inspired/derived from the tricolor. This will be included, including the other image I just shown you and countless others. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 11:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is actually precisely what I meant above. As I envision the future of a flag article, it features and explains the main flag - one used currently - but also gives detailed treatment to all flag variants, be it the past official flags, symbols based on the flag but used for different purposes, or any other derivations. I already added a brief mention about the standard using the image. IgorSF 11:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

LH MIDI renditions
Zach, I now have 2 MIDI renditions of the Lupang Hinirang, the "labor of love" for the mother country by our very own Filipino wikipedian User:Iandres. He wants us to upload to commons ourselves since, being new in Wiki, he is not very familiar with uploading and licenses, with his permission. I am forwarding his emails to you (though they are in Tagalog). Please advice. --Pinay (talk•email) 16:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, the public domain LH from Nox is in Tagalog, not Spanish. --Pinay  (talk•email) 16:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Replied to emails. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The recordings of LH are pretty good, I like them. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Uploads done: Image:Lupang Hinirang by Ian.mid & Image:Lupang J-1-. Felipe's Hinirang by Ian.mid. Please incorporate in article.  Thanks. --Pinay  (talk•email) 02:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * One momement. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, I did not include the one Ian sent which was from the internet. --Pinay (talk•email) 02:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Fwded email just now copy of Ian's version of Hymno Nacional (1896).--Pinay (talk•email) 03:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the [[Image:Hymno Nacional 1896.mid|Hymno Nacional]]. --Pinay (talk•email) 08:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Armenia
Hello, Zscout370! Since you have made so many featured articles about flags, I invite you to the peer review of the Flag of Armenia article. If you have time, please comment on it. Thank you. --Crzycheetah 21:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Order of Canada
That is sad. Perhaps it is worth mentioning that other medals are up for sale - I was actually under the impression that this was the first one to be put up for auction (as it had made the news), and may have written the section of the Order of Canada section to imply that. --G2bambino 21:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I have seen the medals up for auction since 2005 and sold by the user "defence medals canada." I won't add the link here but he has about 3 medals up on eBay related to the Order. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

ANI
Please see my reply. thanks Parthi talk/contribs 10:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Original IHMS-WLY version
Hello Zach, sent u the wma file per instruction from copyright holder. Please do the honors of converting to ogg and including in the IHMS article. Thanks. --Pinay (talk•email) 18:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

LH choral and vocal rendition/s
User:Titopao will have his choral group do a choral and vocal rendition for release to Wikipedia and public domain. How about that? --Pinay (talk•email) 18:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion
Hi, I would really appreciate your opinion on this issue. Thanks! Billtheking 10:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

license tagging
Zach, pls check the tag I've made for this - Image:DearJesusAlbum Lungay.jpg. Using this  did not seem to work. Please advice. --Pinay (talk•email) 16:48, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It's okey now Zach. User:ChicogoN took care of it...--Pinay (talk•email) 18:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Colors for Image:Flag of California.svg
Hi there. Would you mind discussing the changes you made to Image:Flag of California.svg at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California? There's been a lot of back and forth about the design already and I didn't see any discussion for your changes. I've reverted the image on Commons in the meantime. Mike Dillon 17:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't even see that, but on my way to discuss it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I responded on the WP:CAL talk page. Mike Dillon 23:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I want to get this flag as right as much as you do, but I still think the colors are way to light. Ok, your right about the font, so I will change my design to where it uses the Seal color. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Lupang_Hinirang
Hi! I think we, and that means also you, might need to post here the present needs of the article for its improvement. I will place the todo template. Thank you. --Pinay (talk•email) 01:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello! Per my comments on the LH talk page, I'm volunteering to do the sheet music for the Philippine National Anthem. It's actually sitting in my PC and, with a few tweaks here and there, would be ready for uploading. Will be letting you guys know when it's ready :) --- Tito Pao 21:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That will work too. I thank you for not only doing this, but understanding the main goals of Wikipedia: free content. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sent invites to YM chat/conference. I hope Chris S, Titopao, you and anyone else interested can join. what do u think?--Ate Pinay (talk•email) 22:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yall can start without me. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Not materialized as of stamped date...maybe reset at a common and more convenient time.--Ate Pinay (talk•email) 01:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Holy Spirit School of Tagbilaran
Zach, please update me re the upload of the song "On Wings of the Spirit" with AZ's permission. Please do the honors of converting to ogg and placing in the article, as well as music notation. Message me updates. Thank you. --Ate Pinay (talk•email) 20:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

VC (Canada)
I see you reverted that recent addition. You were probably right, although it seemed an interesting suggestion, albeit in a rather unencyclopedic tone. My Latin is unfortunately poor, so I can't comment on its truth or not. I suppose we really need a reference to admit something like this.

X damr talk 16:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That is why I took it out. It sounded like original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. I understood some people had issues with the Latin on the Order of Canada, so you are not the only one who thinks Canada butchers the Latin language. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

ogg conversion instructions
Thank you so much for the detailed/step-by-step list. I appreciate it. --Ate Pinay (talk•email) 22:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Chorus Paulinus
Hi! Will you please look at the Music samples? I think you need to fix it, please. Thank you.--Ate Pinay (talk•email) 22:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Photos you removed from the Hrant Dink article
The crowd photo is a screenshot I got from the Turkish channel, CNN Turk. Why did you remove it? Also the photo of the suspect.--Doktor Gonzo 10:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair use violations. The image of the suspect was very large and it either needed to be removed or reduced. I removed it. As for the CNN photo, I am not sure if we can use it yet, since it felt like CNN is still using the image for their purposes. We should wait on using the CNN photo and maybe shrink the photo of the suspect by about 2/3rds. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Portal Belarus
Hello Zscout370! Thanks for your answer on my discussion. Unfortunally i am not a sysop on the german wikipedia, but thats how life is ;-). I am not sure at the moment of how to Belurasian content on the DE:WP. Mabey you could tell my some Articles that do not excist on the DE:Wikipedia. All in all i was possitive surprised by your answer on my discussion. Manecke 13:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for interrupting you again. Maybey you would lik to re-answer on my german discussion. Manecke 15:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I could reanswer on the German page in a few, but I have classes in a little bit. All I can pretty much tell you is that I made 5 Belarusian articles reach the "featured" status, so your welcome to improve the German articles with what I did. There is also images of Belarus I either found, created or others created, that can be used by searching the Commons. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello again, but he wor you did was quietly good, if i´m alowed to see this. Is your only favourite theme in the wp belarus, or are you also interessted in other themes? Manecke 20:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I like to work on Russian and Belarusian articles, I try to focus on national symbols the most. The work can be seen, I just need to give the list of FA's I did related to Belarus. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

your block of Goodcop
HI Zscout. Over at WP:ANI a sock-puppet case has come up involving this block of yours from November. The discussion is here: Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. Thatcher has suggested that perhaps the indefinite block was a little excessive and that perhaps blocking the sock but setting a limit to the block might be in order. Care to comment? (If so, do it at the ANI-thread linked above.) Best, Buck  ets  ofg  05:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The indefinite block I issued to GoodCop was for legal threats he made against users. He also tried to show authority as a cop and using "investigations" and demanding this and that to be done. I do not have checkuser and I think the evidence for checkuser is way too old. I will not reconsider my block for GoodCop. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've copied your answer over to ANI.  Buck  ets  ofg  13:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

WinMX
I added in a line to the top section cautioning about the scammers trying to charge for the program, and a couple of other things (RTC slowing); is this OK? If you google WinMX, the first several sites to come up are people trying to sell you what should be avilable for free, and I wanted to point this out. Shalom S. 05:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I mentioned about the scamming, but we just do not need to give links to sites that are scamming or trying to "get back" at said scammers. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

re: images
That is fine, I just intended to upload the real logo in the same name later. I will not do it again though. Thanks for letting me know. --MJHankel 01:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

request admin intervention
Hi Zach! This user here is on "vandalism spree" tonight. Please check as to what can be done and that be be blocked Thank you...--Ate Pinay  (talk•email) 03:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

LIRR images
But there's still the problem of naming the copyright holder... can fair use be claimed where the copyright holder is unknown? For instance, there's a drawing of the Ariel, the LIRR's first locomotive, in the book, credited only as "Collection of Harold Fagerberg". (This seems to be very common in railfan books; people build up collections of images, often donated from others, and they're the ones credited.) Common sense would say that it was probably drawn a long time ago, but (1) when was it published and (2) it could have been a recent redrawing. There are some that are actually credited to the photographer, G. B. Brainard, whose collection is preserved at the Brooklyn Public Library, but none of those are particularly useful images, except for one that could be useful on New York and Brooklyn Bridge Railway but not in the LIRR article. --NE2 18:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I definitely plan to source the freight service section. As for the red links, I believe them all to be valid article topics; why should their status affect the quality of this article? --NE2 18:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I know that the US copyright law has a provision for authors that are not publicly known, that might help us in this case. But, since we know who at least has the photo, we could ask Mr. Fagerberg if he knows. But that is only assuming if there was a way we could contact him or if he is still living. If not, I will go personally digging myself. The reason why I mentioned the red-links is that many red links seem to be distracting for users and I was opposed on a few FAC's that I did for the numerous red links that occured. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The book's from 1965. I don't think we'll find Harold Fagerberg. --NE2 20:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, fair enough. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Belarus
Hi, I'm working on it at User:Rudjek/Portal:Belarus. Could you take a look and give your opinion.--Rudjek 13:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty good, detailed response on your talk page. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you think you could give me a list of the Belarus-related featured articles, featured pictures (I need at least one good picture), DYKs (a couple of those would do nicely) and perhaps recommend a famous, well-known and loved Belarusian (I doubt Lukashenko would do). Is there a notice-board where I can request information on this kind of thing (the Russian one maybe)?--Rudjek 21:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The list of FA's is at the Portal, but I can reproduce them here: Hero of Belarus – Flag of Belarus – Belarusian Republican Youth Union – National emblem of Belarus – My Belarusy. Not sure about the photos, and all I know is that Hero of Belarus was a DYK. I am not sure if there is a noticeboard that I can think of, but I can help you personally with anything that you need with this portal. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Better now? All that's needed now is a selected picture, a selected biography and one or more used DYKs, can you think of anything? Do you think I should start updating the "live" Portal:Belarus yet?--Rudjek 18:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll look for the DYK's, but I doubt there are many. Yes, you can go ahead and update the live version. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:ZSMP logo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:ZSMP logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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. This is an automated message from BJBot 04:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Nuked. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Ribbon

 * Image:Barnstar userpage.gif

Hey! Hope you are all pumped up for ribbon :P -- Cat out 16:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I already have one in place, Image:Userpage barnstar ribbon.png. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Images listed for deletion
Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them. Thank you. NThurston 18:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:Wiki merit badge.png
 * Image:Eagle scout palm bronze.png
 * Image:Eagle scout palm gold.png
 * Image:Eagle scout palm silver.png

Canadian Heraldic Authority Review
Canadian Heraldic Authority has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Eva b d  21:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Addressed. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

This is a automated to all bot operators
Please take a few moments and fill in the data for your bot on Bots/Status Thank you Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 19:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Zbot370 is discontinued. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:PhilippinesGov
Hi Zscout370. You converted the above template to a CSD template, so all the images linked to it would be marked for speedy deletion. As this dumped 500 images into the speedy deletion backlog, it's been converted back to the template (not by me). As nowhere near all of them ought to be speedily deleted, it might be better to go through thwe images and tag only those that ought to be deleted. Proto :: ►  13:21, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That was my intent, to have the photos speedy deleted since they are non-commercial. Most do not have fair use rationals anyways, which is what that template states it needed in order to be saved from deletion. Not quite sure what else you want me to do, since we cannot have these photos and I am sure as hell that these photos will not be deleted if people don't know they are slated for it. I will figure something out when I get home. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

GMA Network articles
Can you please restore them? I was looking around and most were rather flimsy; "article created with history of copyright infrigement," "had a copyvio," etc. I mean, come on, I'd rather revert it to the last clean version. And if I turn into a copyright violator, would that mean the hasty, speedy deletion of Philippines since I heavily edited it? That looks like a bad reason on deleting articles, don't you think? -- Howard  the   Duck  17:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The articles can be recreated (I said that twice at WP:PINOY); and this is standard procedure. We check the articles that person edited and if it turns out to be nothing but copyright violations, they can be deleted with no bias on recreation. But I will restore the diffs later that are not offending. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The thing is they can be undeleted too, and these have revision histories which are copyvio-free; I had to clean out the newly recreated Super Twins article since it had a copyvio; if all articles were created with copyvios then they'll be deleted, again. -- Howard  the   Duck  17:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Recreate and I will restore the non offending edits. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, be doing that later. -- Howard  the   Duck  01:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, once you done that, let me know and I will restore the non-offending edits. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Can writing something like even if its really bare (like one sentence)? Is it enough? I don't watch these programs and I don't know anything about them. -- Howard  the   Duck  02:10, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:47, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Purple Heart
I never knew that about the Purple Heart award. I just assumed it was something else since John Kerry won three of them and even in Canada we heard about it immensely. I looked over the AfD again and it seems like people are relatively undecided about the article even though most of the votes do look like Deletes. I may as well keep my Keep vote as I am sympathetic to the idea of remembering those lost to us and I think a Wikipedia article that is historic to the event is not a bad way to do it. It's something I could see someone googling and clicking on the Wikipedia link to find out more. Mkdw talk 11:21, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Thank you for messaging me, and thank you again for being sensitive to the voting process. I always find it difficult to message people regarding their vote. =)
 * Yes, John Kerry mentioned the Purple Hearts, almost saying it is an act of bravery. But really, a Purple Heart means you got injured or killed in combat by enemy fire. I know how you feel about honoring the US troops, a neighbor of mine was killed in Iraq in 2004 and my dad just came back from there. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:21, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Peer Guardian
Interesting, but at this point all of that is "he said/she said" speculation. That stuff needs to be verified by a professional. -Strider01 15:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That is what I am trying to tell you is that information from there might be added to Wikipedia, so if you see it, remove it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Strider01 14:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Parepin
Why did you lock and delete this article? If it is viral advertising and no such drug exists, it should clearly be indicated on the wikipedia page, and then locked, if vandalism is a problem. JudgeX 18:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, from the looks of what I found its some sort of viral advertising/nonsense, but rather than just locking the page it would have been much more useful to display that than to display nothing.
 * And we cannot even display that, so I had no choice but to use the deleted page tag. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Would you mind redirecting Parepin to Year Zero (album), and then locking it again? The viral marketing pages that mention Parepin are listed there.  -- Norvy (talk) 18:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, sounds like a plan. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Location Maps
On the WikiProject Countries talk page, you had either explictly declared a general interest in the project, or had participated at a discussion that appears related to Location Maps for European countries. New maps had been created by David Liuzzo, and are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps. As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions), and also which new version should be applied for which countries. Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. The subsections on the talk page that had shown David Liuzzo's original maps, now show his most recent design. Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the '''presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited''' to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option. There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 7 Feb2007 20:44 (UTC)

In reply to your message posted on the voting page: "the focus of the maps should be on the country, not some super-union that some countries cannot be a part of, like Belarus." Your statement is misunderstanding the current European (at large) politic. --Huygens 25 09:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * First, the EU is not a super-union that some countries cannot be part of. It has emerged as an economical union and lately changed to a more political association. In some aspects it resembles federal states, because many laws are decided by the EU commission or parliament, and the member states are transposing them to their local laws. To build such an entity, it is hard to accept all countries at once. It has been tried with what is known as the Eastern Europe enlargement. But, in some way it failed. Too many different cultures at once and even the core state citizen feel lost, thus rejecting the European Constitution. People also feel discourage because for example in the Netherlands, they are paying a lot of their taxes to improve the economy of the new member countries or other member countries not performing well, while at the same time they have their social benefits decreasing... They feel it like unfair. So I'm pretty sure (own opinion) that it will take time before new EU member comes in. You cannot build a cathedral on sand directly, it requires some special effort and technics.
 * Second, as for the Belarus example. This is one example that is easy to comment. The president Loukashenko is more of a dictator than a democratically elected president. He is also more or less the puppet of the Russian. These are two reasons why Belarus cannot join the EU now. They need to have a democratic government and institutions, and get their independence (in terms of political decision) from Moscow. Some decision in Europe requires that 100% of the states agree on them. Russia could then block some process within Europe if they would not be happy with some of their decision. I guess you don't want to have North Corea be part of the United States, do you? I mean that they choose to join the Union but still keep their dictator...

Belarus talk archive
Good idea to clean the page up a bit. The talk page could probably use a bit more cleanup, but it is a good start. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 23:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Certainly will. I am going to see what topics are old and maybe move them over. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Many Thanks!
Much gratitude for restoring my page. InfernoXV 05:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Welcome. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Re:Block
No problem, don't worry about it. It actually took me a while to work out what your message was about, as I wasn't editing at the time so I didn't notice at all. What happened was I saw that AN had been vandalised, but by the time I clicked on history then rollback Ryulong had obviously fixed it, so my edit rolled him back instead. Raven4x4x 10:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lubeh group photo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Lubeh group photo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. - Tragic Baboon (banana receptacle) 04:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Photo deleted. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

ASPIRE copyvio
Because I couldn't prove it.Geni 12:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, but at least we now know. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Friendly Chat
I was just checking out some of my friends here and decided to drop you a line since I haven't written to you in some time. I noticed that I am in your Wikifriends list and I wanted you to know that I feel honored to be among your friend here. I also consider you a good friend and please give your dad a "Semper Fi" on my behave. Tony the Marine 19:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I certainly will. Pretty much, while I do admit that our first encounter was not on the best of terms, but as a Marine, I knew you would see past it and focus on the future. That is why I put you in my friends list; I value Marines and their service, just like what my father is doing (he is a E-9, Master Gunnery Sergeant). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Your latest edit to Template:PhilippinesGov
For some reason, your latest edit to Template:PhilippinesGov isn't working. I don't understand why, but when I randomnly clicked a few images Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:PhilippinesGov, they don't show the "no license" tag, they just should "1. Redirect Template:No license." Something needs to be done, but I do not know what. --Iamunknown 20:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That is what I was told to do in order for OrphanBot to add it to the no license category. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem I had was that I forgot a colon infront of Template. It should work now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Aus. anthem
The Australian gov. probably won't be much help; they couldn't even tell me who designed the coat of arms when I asked. There is a good fair use argument for reproducing the lyrics, but I think the best way to avoid violating copyright on the current version is to just highlight the parts of the original lyrics that make up the current anthem, the differences are already explained in test, which you suggest on the talk page. Maybe we could use a coloured box around each of the two verses like people seem to be using for long quotes? --Peta 04:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If it was me, I would just use bolding, as I done with the Mexican anthem, but whatever works best for highlighting the areas, that is fine by me. If the consulate won't help, I will write a physical letter to that office I mentioned on the talk page, if yall do not mind waiting. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * So you want to ask for official permission for commercial use? I really doubt that they grant it given that anyone can subsequently edit the text. --Peta 04:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The article contents, of course, are editable. But I am sure the lyrics will be left intact. Just for the formatting is what needs debating, and I can ask to see if we can do that. I will also ask about unofficial translations, since I am hoping to get this issue solved for the other Wikipedia, since more of them are ditching fair use. I plan including a copy of the article to show what we are doing too. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

ASPIRE copyvio
Because I couldn't prove it.Geni 12:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, but at least we now know. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Friendly Chat
I was just checking out some of my friends here and decided to drop you a line since I haven't written to you in some time. I noticed that I am in your Wikifriends list and I wanted you to know that I feel honored to be among your friend here. I also consider you a good friend and please give your dad a "Semper Fi" on my behave. Tony the Marine 19:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I certainly will. Pretty much, while I do admit that our first encounter was not on the best of terms, but as a Marine, I knew you would see past it and focus on the future. That is why I put you in my friends list; I value Marines and their service, just like what my father is doing (he is a E-9, Master Gunnery Sergeant). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Your latest edit to Template:PhilippinesGov
For some reason, your latest edit to Template:PhilippinesGov isn't working. I don't understand why, but when I randomnly clicked a few images Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:PhilippinesGov, they don't show the "no license" tag, they just should "1. Redirect Template:No license." Something needs to be done, but I do not know what. --Iamunknown 20:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That is what I was told to do in order for OrphanBot to add it to the no license category. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem I had was that I forgot a colon infront of Template. It should work now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Aus. anthem
The Australian gov. probably won't be much help; they couldn't even tell me who designed the coat of arms when I asked. There is a good fair use argument for reproducing the lyrics, but I think the best way to avoid violating copyright on the current version is to just highlight the parts of the original lyrics that make up the current anthem, the differences are already explained in test, which you suggest on the talk page. Maybe we could use a coloured box around each of the two verses like people seem to be using for long quotes? --Peta 04:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If it was me, I would just use bolding, as I done with the Mexican anthem, but whatever works best for highlighting the areas, that is fine by me. If the consulate won't help, I will write a physical letter to that office I mentioned on the talk page, if yall do not mind waiting. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * So you want to ask for official permission for commercial use? I really doubt that they grant it given that anyone can subsequently edit the text. --Peta 04:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The article contents, of course, are editable. But I am sure the lyrics will be left intact. Just for the formatting is what needs debating, and I can ask to see if we can do that. I will also ask about unofficial translations, since I am hoping to get this issue solved for the other Wikipedia, since more of them are ditching fair use. I plan including a copy of the article to show what we are doing too. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Automated message to bot owners
As a result of discussion on the village pump and mailing list, bots are now allowed to edit up to 15 times per minute. The following is the new text regarding bot edit rates from Bot Policy: "Until new bots are accepted they should wait 30-60 seconds between edits, so as to not clog the recent changes list and user watchlists. After being accepted and a bureaucrat has marked them as a bot, they can edit at a much faster pace. Bots doing non-urgent tasks should edit approximately once every ten seconds, while bots who would benefit from faster editing may edit approximately once every every four seconds." Also, to eliminate the need to spam the bot talk pages, please add Bot owners' noticeboard to your watchlist. Future messages which affect bot owners will be posted there. Thank you. --Mets501 05:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Belarus copyedit complete
Hi! The League of Copyeditors has completed work on Belarus. I added several questions in hidden comments. Check the edit history for details. Good luck with your FA bid! Galena11 22:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your service. I will answer this questions now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

hello
Just wondering what you meant here: diff with 'God I hate you people'. Thanks for your reply. Maîtresse 23:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Operation Joint Guardian was the major operation bringing stability to Kosovo, but it took yeard for them just to get a stub article. So that is why I left that statement, since people love to be creating articles on the next webgem website or term, yet we leave out current events. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

GA
Try submitting it to the Good article review if there is no review on Talk:Belarus - modern (in wiki terms :) ) GA procedurs require reviewing the article and writing comments on artcle's talk page before assiging it the GA-status (which makes the GA, which once I considered pointless, actually relativly useful).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The history section has very poor references, for starters. There are no NPOV issues that I can detect, on the bright side :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I may do this, but for now I will wait to see how the article improves. Basically, every fact should have a reference... and when I get to it, in article with such poor inline ref coverage, some people tend to accuse me of fact spamming and uglyfing the article - alas, look at my most recent FA to see what standard I now both expect and enforce in articles I edit.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Nothing since 1920 war (and the post-war border change), although there might have been some tiny adjustment at some point later... perhaps sb at the board would now better.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 06:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sb = somebody... it's late and I tend to use abbrvs. when tired :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 07:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Re:Kremlin
Thanks, I'll post it on Wikipedia talk:Notice board for India-related topics =Nichalp   «Talk»=  06:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Welcome. I added more links that I found. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Galleries
Hi, I've had no success with afds against these Category:Numismatic galleries. Could you take a look. The Numismatics seem to think that galleries of FU are OK and vote en masse to keep this stuff.--Peta 00:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm taking a look. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Awards
There are three proposals which need some comments. Please weigh in: Two of the three are sensitive, and thuglas is taking the whole process personally. Finally, there has never been a standard for how much support is needed for the creation of a barnstar. The LGBT star went up with seven votes, and thuglas is threatening to post his star when he gets ten supportive votes. Thoughts? --evrik (talk) Barnstar]] Two of the three are sensitive, and thuglas is taking the whole process personally. Finally, there has never been a standard for how much support is needed for the creation of a barnstar. The LGBT star went up with seven votes, and thuglas is threatening to post his star when he gets ten supportive votes. Thoughts? --evrik (talk)
 * Moving the LGBT Barnstar
 * Changes to The Editor's Barnstar
 * New_Proposals - Neuroscience_Barnstar
 * Changes to The Editor's Barnstar
 * New_Proposals - Neuroscience_Barnstar


 * Once again, someone disagrees with my interpretation of our very loose guidelines. Now I don't mind when two users like WJBscribe and Kathryn_NicDh%C3%A0na, but they've taken the disagreement and posted negative comments over at that RFC.


 * So ... could you please weigh in one last time ... new barnstar or a wikiproject award Barnstar_and_award_proposals/New_Proposals. Thanks. --evrik (talk) 22:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Old cleanup tag
I just removed a cleanup tag you put in an article back in 2005:. I am in general not much in favour of cleanup tags not explaining what needs cleanup. They are not very informative, and are often left in the article after the issues are taken care or. In this case, since you were apparently thinking of fixing the article back then... I just though I'd srop you a note to give you the chance to look at it again. // habj 16:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No a major problem, I will plan on eventually make something of that article later. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

.png to .svg
Hey Zach, this  is fair use. Will converting this to .svg help? or not. What do you propose I use as icon for the Bohol Portal link? --Ate Pinay (talk•email) 18:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not sure about the copyright issue with the seals, but I suggest to remove it from userboxes and all of that stuff. I think it might needs to go from the Bohol Portal tag. As for the png to svg tag, it doesn't determine the copyright status of an image. It is just saying that it needs to be in another format. (I am at college now, but if Jaja is on, I will try and speak to her soon, hopefully.) User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

promophoto business
Thanks for your quick response. That's precisely the understanding I got from reading 5-10 talk pages that dealt with this. Of course Wikimedia controls all language editions equally and so I figured - this is probably coming our way eventually. But this magical email directive from above isn't referenced anywhere. Plus, it would be good to know how two community members of the Wikimedia Board voted on this issue and whether Jimbo voted opposite to both, just one or they were all together. Needless to say this can alienate people - a political decision (not a legal question) against a significant part of the community. Sorry, this doesn't look good, regardless what Jimbo thinks. --Dzordzm 08:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * There is no difference between srwiki and enwiki as far as copyright issues go. Both are projects of Wikimedia Foundation, HQ'ed in Florida, stored and distributed from U.S. servers, etc. There are issues I wish were cleared up somewhere, for example what makes Airbus logo fair use at enwiki - but these apply equally to all language editions. Honestly whether a user from Germany edits in dewiki or enwiki should make no difference as far as applicable law and the understanding adopted in srwiki is that we are generally subject to U.S. law (of course individual images are subject to laws of the country where they were created, but that's regardless).
 * Of course you're free to browse srwiki and I'd be glad to hear any suggestions. I introduced image copyright tags in May 2005 and starting July 2006 we have been deleting images without proper licences within seven days plus mass-deleting previously uploaded unlicensed and wrongly licensed material. While not all our material is compliant due to the amount of work and some moot legal issues (which are exacerbated by the poor general legal conditions in Serbia, e.g. images being routinely used in mainstream media or archives without any attribution and very poor general awareness on copyright issues) I think we have been making remarkable progress in the last year or so. I'm curoius about your perceptions :) --Dzordzm 09:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S.When browsing srwiki you may find it helpful to click on "latinica" tab in the upper-right corner - it's more readable for non-speakers than our Cyrillic scrypt. --Dzordzm 09:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

North America (Americas)
You may not know this, I'll try to explain it as simple as I can. User Corticopia (remember Cogito Ergo Sumo, E Pluribus Anthony and Ex Post Factoid from the article North America? ) has been pushing the POV that Mexico is part of Central America. We had an edit warring in the article Mexico and a debate Talk:Mexico, in which we provided enough evidence that a portion of southeastern Mexico is physiographically in Central America, but that geopolitically Mexico is in the North American region. He agreed and he proceeded to edit the article in that way.

Now he's denying that and is editing all the articles that mention Mexico is in North America (namely Americas (terminology), Middle America (Americas), an article he defends a lot; and used to edit the article Central America).

He nominated the article North America (Americas) for deletion, saying that it was created following a POV pushing. I created the article in order to avoid confusion and in order to have the different models used in the Americas (North, Central, South or the model Corticopia likes, Northern, Middle and South). Also because the Template:Regions of the world lacked an article about the NA region, it used to have a link to North America (continent).

Can you please vote in this? I think it is unacceptable to try to delete a perfectly valid article, just because he wants to. Thanks for your help. Alex  Covarrubias  ( Let's talk! ) 14:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Other than being a veiled ad hominem argument, I think YOU have gone too far AC. As I've stated there, there is a key difference -- the content regarding the sub/regions of Northern America (which is not merely a UN construct; see article) and Middle America (numerous definitions provided) are well sourced, while that of the 'region' of North America isn't.  This doesn't deny other continental models, but no sources have been provided that clearly delineate what the model upon which the nominated article is based.  The sources in North America (Americas) do not support the content in that article, and a read of those sources will reveal that.  Regardless, if necessary, applicable content can be added to the North America article instead of forking and conflating.  Corticopia 14:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Alex, read what I wrote in the AFD page. Pretty much, while I do not think your intent for article creation was bad, I think you just went about it the wrong way. What I would suggest is merge whatever is useful in the article you made into North America and allow for a redirect to be made. But I would like to suggest this to you and Corticopia, just chill out and relax. I know yall had disputes before, even lashing out at each other at AFD's. I don't know what caused the disputes, but I want it to stop now. I worked with you before Alex on the article related to the Mexican flag, though to be honest, I have not worked with Corticopia at all. But I honestly believe the both of you have done good for Wikipedia; I hate to see the two of you go at it like this. We need good people on here, I want the two of you to stay on here, but try to work out the differences the both of you have. If you need my help to do so, then I can do it. Please, please, please just calm down and relax. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. I do think that we need a mediator, I am asking for your help. Alex  Covarrubias  [[Image:Flag of Mexico.svg|15px]] ( Let's talk! ) 16:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I can help out (though sadly, I am about to head to class). Have Corticopia contact me by email too so we can sort the problem out. (I mainly like to use email for this for privacy reasons). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ermmhh... I don't know your e-mail! Alex  Covarrubias  [[Image:Flag of Mexico.svg|15px]] ( Let's talk! ) 16:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Either here or the Commons, go to my userpage and press "email this user." That should do it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Wall of Honor
Because of your dedication and your excellent work in Wikipedia, I have inducted you to my "Wall of Honor" Tony the Marine 21:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)




 * I am touched. *Salutes* User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 22:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me
 * I finished the survey; I chose for the 10 USD to be sent to the Foundation. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Awards Coordinator referendum
There has been some conflict at WikiProject Awards. Please vote on the Coordinator referendum. --South Philly 20:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Belarus FA
I will see what I can do in a few days. Meanwhile, I believe Turkey is a country FA... - good for inspiration (clickable map is great).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Kremlin.ru stuff
I’d rather play talk page tag, because it’s easier to wikilink stuff here. In this case, the interesting link is Федеральный закон от 9.07.1993 № 5351-1 or Russian Federation. Law on Copyright and Neighboring Rights (links like that look ugly in e-mail), where rights are listed which are exclusively granted to the author of a copyrighted work. If others are to have these rights, the author, or somebody duly authorised by the author, must grant them the rights first. A good example of this is §3 of the CC–BY–2.5 licence. Note that it lists precisely which rights are granted to the user. Conversely, the kremlin.ru licence covers only reproduction:

Although it may have been the intent here to grant further rights (we can’t tell and I’m not optimistic about getting a reply to my e-mail to them), such rights are not discussed in the licence. Unless there is a separate agreement between the copyright holder and us, those rights therefore remain exclusively with the copyright holder.

While it is unlikely that the agency behind the website would object to our use of the material, we should not claim towards downstream users that the material is free (as in ‘freedom’), which means—as far as I understand the concept of Commons—that it should not be on Commons and that we should only use it here under the usual restrictions for non-free (including ‘free’ as in ‘free beer’) material, with all the implications for necessity, replaceability, quality and quantity.

…I hope whoever invented copyright suffered for it. —xyzzyn 15:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. commons:User:Voyaka says the permission applies only to text, anyway. I haven’t checked that, yet. —xyzzyn 15:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if it is for text only, since it says materials from the Presidental Press Service are under this same license. The Press Service does photographs (and we usually see the photos with a byline saying who are they from). I personally think here are the two problems: one, many pictures will be affected by the license change and two, many of the Russian users probably still feel burned from the PD-USSR debates. While I think we should have the license clarified, I am not sure how we can do it (unless we can have Wikipedia Russia sort the mess out, since we could send users to Moscow). As for the pictures on en.wikipedia, don't worry about them, since if the licenses change, I can just speedy the images I uploaded on that license. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As for the all text, I doubt that is true, since "all materials" usually means text, photos, video, audio. If they would have disallowed photos, they would be saying "all text" instead. Regardless, I am going to play email tag with the Kremlin. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Good luck. (I sent one on Monday.) —xyzzyn 16:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I realise that the situation is frustrating for people who edit Russia/USSR-related articles, but vis-à-vis copyright law and the third pillar, this doesn’t carry much weight. We already make exceptions for historical images; there is no reason to make exceptions for the rest, especially not if it is mostly a matter of convenience. There are ca. 200 files on Commons tagged with this tag (and probably several thousand more files tagged with other tags with similar terms), but many of them are replaceable and some of the others may be fair use. If we wait with clarifying the status of tags like this one, we’ll simply end up with even more images—which will still need clarification. I’m not really sure what you suggest—they don’t seem to like e-mail and I doubt they’d appreciate a mob of Wikipedians showing up to ask about ‘криэтив камонс’. (The time when a village could send somebody to petition comrade Lenin for electrification of their village (and the petitioner) is long past.) Basically, for them, the easiest and safest thing is not to say anything on the topic. —xyzzyn 16:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I know about the pilars, and I like to defend those pillars along with the next guy. However, as I was thinking it over, my problem is this: because of the lack of disclosure of the modifcation terms, that is why they are going through the delete debate. Usually, if a website wants you to not to do something, they will specifically state it. In our case, the Russians didn't state about modification, so we will have to wait and see. (As for some of the photos, they could be fair use, but many, they would need to be deleted or replace eventually). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * My problem is that—unless I misunderstand it—copyright law means they do not have to say anything on the issue and we still couldn’t use their material. Notes like ‘all rights reserved’, ‘educational use only’ or ‘derivative works permitted only on the third Tuesday in Nullary facing northwest’ are a matter of courtesy (and, in litigation, a matter of being able to say ‘told you so’). Not to answer requests for clarification of such notes is rude, but does not grant the requesting parties any rights (except the right to complain in public about the fact). So, while news agency photos are definitely not usable, I think we can’t use Press Service material either, unless, of course, they modify the terms to make it free. Given the current lag in the Commons deletion process (I still have an open deletion request from January), we’re going to wait and see no matter what happens. However, if they don’t say anything (useful), then, eventually, we’re going to have to make an assumption, and that assumption should consider law and policy before usefulness. —xyzzyn 00:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If the Kremlin said nothing at all and just with a standard "all rights reserved" copyright notice, then we would have gotten rid of the pictures from the Commons long ago. But with the things they said at the "media use" page, that caused someone in the past to go ahead and create the license. Keep in mind we probably had it before we got rid of non-commercial/non-modification photos. Now we are starting that, I guess it is one of the victims. I just think that with our different views, and not to mention, a different country we are dealing with, this will not be an easy issue to solve. If the template is deleted, that is fine, and I will not use the Kremlin again for photo sources. I am just trying to stay calm and rational, though some people are voting keep for the template based on my thinking (which could be a bad thing). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The Commons template exists since 2005-08-19 and you created the local version on 2005-09-30; the decree to remove NC images is from 2005-05-19. —xyzzyn 01:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok. If you wish to delete the EN version and rid of the photos there, you have my blessing to do it (not like you need my permission anyways, but it makes thing easier since there is only 5 pics to deal with, 4 from me). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I’d like to figure out the matter on Commons first, to have some sort of precedent, and also to see how far policy goes there. The eventual goal is to sort commons:Commons:Copyright tags into tags that are free and tags that need to be deleted (and likewise with the corresponding images, of course). —xyzzyn 02:02, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:PhilippinesGov
Hi, why did you reverted this template back to the redirect to the no license tag. It's obviously an unfree license and a whole bunch have to be deleted, but probably not all of them and right now they all have a speedy delete tag on them. See also Category:Unfree SXC licensed images, also unfree but not immediately deleted. A few weeks to notify uploaders wouldn't be so bad. Garion96 (talk) 18:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sort of never mind, I missed this edit in the history. A notice on the talk page would have been handy. :) I wonder why the board is so hard on those images and left so many other non-commercial or other unfree images open. I do agree btw, but it still seems too fast. Garion96 (talk) 18:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It was mandated by the Board and there are threads on WP:PINOY about it. As for it being fast, I do not think so. There was plenty of time for discussion and after 3 months, I had to take action. We are still in the process of getting rid of these images, as you can see in the above discussion of the Kremlin.ru template. It sucks, but it has to be done. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:PINOY is not on my watchlist. :) It's just weird that the other unfree categories has been here for years, and this one has to go immediately. But I do agree, the more unfree images gone (except perhaps a small group which could fall under fair use) the better. Garion96 (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean; it took months to debate of wether the PD images from the former USSR takes time. However, debates have been going quicker over time since we now have the ability to remove images with bots and also to restore images deleted on accident. I just wanted to be sure that all of the images were removed and orphaned before they were deleted. With the SXC images, people are still debating about those and some were uploaded before the deadline of non-commercial images. Soon enough, they will be rid of too. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Libyseal.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Libyseal.png, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —xyzzyn 22:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Deleted. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

That katakana
アイワントツービーヰスユーフォーエヴァー— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍 ) 08:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Domo arigato, Ryulongsan. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Global Country of World Peace
Could you explain why you thought the article above was spam? --Sueyen 20:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * When I saw it, the article read like a self promotion newsletter about the organization and only uses their own website for references. So, going by what I have done in the past, I deleted it. However, what I am going to do is make the above article redirect over to Transcendental Meditation. Several of the other articles about Transcendental Meditation have been either met with merging or deleting, because they either are not notable to cover in an article on it's own or best covered in another section. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate it! --Sueyen 01:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Dinoco logo
Why is the Dinoco image being deleted? Please respond on my talk page. A•N•N•A foxlove r  19:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It is a copyrighted logo of Disney, thus they hold the copyright and we cannot redo the logo and put it in the public domain. And since it is only used for userboxes, it cannot be on Wikipedia at all. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It was on the Dinoco article, not just on userboxes. I made it specifically for the Dinoco article. Is there any copyright tag that can be put on the image? A•N•N•A  foxlove r  00:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not sure, but it is going to stay deleted. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Block
I wasn't disrupting Wikipedia. - PatricknoddyTALK (reply here) | HISTORY 18:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Even if you were not disrupting Wikipedia, under the scripts and bots policy, a script being ran by a user that is causing problems on Wikipedia, we can block it until the script is stopped running. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

'North America (Americas)' ... again
Thank you for weighing in on this prior AfD. Even though an apparent consensus supported the prior AfD in some way, and the article has been deleted, this has reared its head again -- please peruse and weigh in. Thanks! Corticopia 22:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * DRV, from what I see now, it has a lot of endorse votes. The person who deleted the article is a person I trust very well. However, DRV usually is for improper deletions (like if I delete the article on AMLO and protected it). However, I think it was a proper deletion, since a lot of the voting for keep was either keep (then signatures) or trying to discredit you. So just relax, though I think a second AFD might be coming. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the response; you might want to weigh in there, but I leave that to you. I believe the nominator of the review (and some others) do believe the AfD to be improper or that the 'retention' viewpoint has been unnecessarily deprecated.  I'm unsure what you mean by (so to speak) 'the second coming' and I truly hope this is the last of it, but life is full of surprises: as Reagan said, "Trust, but Verify."  In any event, thanks again for your input.  Corticopia 09:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What I meant by a second coming of the AFD is that one of the decisions that an admin can make is called a "relist at AFD." It means the article gets sent back to AFD for yet another debate. I think it is heading towards that way, though I am seeing more endorses than restores (maybe enough to relist, since I know some people on Wikipedia are process wonks, since "consensus" wasn't made). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 15:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

A requsest
For a stub on a Belarusian town: Skidel :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

OTRS at Image:Skydive exit.jpg
Zscout, are you a OTRS personnel? I noticed you [ added] an OTRS template to Image:Skydive exit.jpg, but I do not see your account name at OTRS/personnel. --Iamunknown 02:07, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. I was added to OTRS less than an hour ago. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Copyright license of Image:Flag of FOTW.svg
I can find no information suggesting that the Flags of the World flag is freely licensed. Am I missing something? --Iamunknown 05:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You can ask my boss, the FOTW director, Rob Reaside, if you contact him using the FOTW website. While I have not seen a copyright claim to the image or to the flag itself, it doesn't hurt to ask him. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mdew.png
You just deleted Image:Mdew.png—a picture of mine—with the reasoning “and Warhol's copyright still exists on the soup cans painting, so this is a copyvio”. I do not remember seeing a notice that you were considering doing this, and your reasoning in this case is faulty. The picture I uploaded was not by Warhol, it was by me, so the only copyright involved (PepsiCo does have a trademark on the the name Mountain Dew, but that is different) was my copyright. Since I released the image to the public domain, it can not be a copyright violation. Please restore the image and its talk page which explained this in greater detail. —MJBurrage • TALK  • 14:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No. The logo is still under copyright of Pepsi Co. We cannot draw a logo ourselves and put it into the public domain. Just like with the above logo issue with Disney, we cannot draw someone elses copyright and make it our own. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * But their logo is not copyrighted, it is trademarked. Bass beer’s trademarked logo is a red triangle, the trademark only stops you from using a red triangle commercially in the beer (possibly beverage) market.  Long before the soda existed, Mountain Dew meant whisky, and it was the name of the editorial column in the Catskill Mountain News.  PepsiCo’s trademark only makes it illegal to use it to pretend to be them in the commercial marketplace.  While many trademark holders would like us to believe that trademark is the same as (or even stronger than) copyright it is just different.
 * When Warhol painted the Campbell’s soup can he did not violate any copyrights because they did not apply, and he did not violate trademark, because he was not pretending to be the soup company. My picture in no way violated copyright, and it would only violate trademark if used deceptively. —MJBurrage • TALK  • 19:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Having not gotten a response, I will be reposting a Mountain Dew image soon. Furthermore, to add to the above information, under US law typefaces cannot be copyrighted, and as PepsiCo is an American company, that is the law that would apply here. —MJBurrage • TALK  • 05:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * They are still using the logo in other places. Plus, with Mountain Dew being created not long ago (1940's) their original copyright on the logo won't expire for several more years. So, please, do not upload it again. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 08:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You keep claiming they have a copyright to their logo, logos are trademarked NOT copyrighted. Now if they used a copyrighted picture as part of a trademarked logo than you would be correct, but typefaces are not copyrightable, and the image I posted was only the words Mountain Dew in a similar typeface, I deliberately did not include the graphic swirls that are around the current logo (In part to make the image timeless, and in part in case somebody mistakenly believed they were copyrighted.  Since the name Mountain Dew, is not copyrightable, and the typeface is not copyrightable, my image is not copyright infringement.  Commercial misuse would be trademark infringement, but that is not an issue here. —MJBurrage •  TALK  • 16:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It is still a logo being used by a company; and on Wikipedia, we treat logos are fair use images. And fair use images cannot be used in the userspace. What I can suggest is that if this logo is mostly for the userspace, just go with the standard MD text, with each letter the green and red color, and use that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You are incorrect in your assertion that a trademark cannot also be copyrighted. Pepsico's rendition of the Mountain Dew logo is well within the scope of copyright under US law, and you may not make copies of it without either license from Pepsico or a legitimate claim that such copies fall within fair use, and if you do make such copies you may not upload them to Wikipedia except as permitted by Wikipedia's "fair use" policies.  Generally speaking, logos may be and generally are copyrighted.  Kelly Martin (talk) 17:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Bounty
"Honored Teacher of the Republic of Belarus" sounds exactly like what I'm looking for! Teachers the world over deserve recognition, and I'll pay the bounty for an article in the English WP on any national teacher recognition program. As long as the word "teacher" actually applies to an educator (and it isn't some loaded political term used for ideological reasons, eg. "Kim Il Sung is the Great Teacher of the People"), I'll be very happy to award the bounty.

As far as the terms of the bounty, I give $50 if the article makes it to FA status; or $25, if the article simply exists in non-stub form. Thanks! Xoloz 14:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll try and get started on it soon. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Logo on Chechen Wiki
Hey! Dont know if you got my message. I finished the new Chechen logo. Search for Image:Wiki.png on ce.wikipedia.org. Problem is, I dont now how to update it. How do you do it? I have sysop status so either you or I can do it. Please tell me :) Respond on my Talk page on Chechen wiki. Thanks :) --Ice201 16:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Responded on your talk page, as you requested. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:45, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

And I responded on your talk page on Chechen wiki. :) Wish we all just had one simple talk page :) haha --Ice201 03:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Philippine National Anthem
Why did you delete the link I put in the page for the Philippine National Anthem? Inkan1969 19:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * We generally do not host YouTube links due to copyright issues. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * O.K. I'll look for a non YouTube vocal link.  Or maybe someone can add a vocal .ogg file to go with the instrumental .ogg file? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Inkan1969 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Already two steps ahead of you: I am in the process of getting vocal recordings we can use. You can talk to the folks at WP:PINOY to see some of the details. I still need to convert the files to OGG, but I am waiting for the vinyl recordings to be copied. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize for any trouble I might've caused you. While you're at it you might want to find a vocal recording for the Uzbekistan national anthem to replace the youtube link you deleted.  And if you happen to find other Anthem pages with youtube links, and those links are the only vocal links on those pages, would you consider replacing them with usable vocal recordings instead of just deleting them and leaving nothing?  Thanks. Inkan1969 20:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem with that request is this: we cannot just randomly link to mp3 files too. Plus, many of the vocal recordings have some copyright issues, so it would not bear fruit to upload them. I have a recording of the Uzbek anthem, and I think their symbols are PD, so I can see what I can do with that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Serbian flags
I uploaded the PNG versions, see Image:Standard of the President of Serbia.png and Image:Standard of the President of the National Assembly of Serbia.png. I would still feel more comfortable if it would be possible to fix existing SVGs instead of making them from scratch though. Nikola 20:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I tried to fix the SVG files that you have done, but they crashed my computer a few times. Even the ones that I did myself causes my computer to crash (to the point where I had to do data recovery). We can use the PNG's for now, there is no hurry to get to SVG, since I need to find someone who has a higher memory to do these images. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

just a sharing
FYI, pls read this --Ate Pinay  (talk•email) 06:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Belarus audio file
Here are two files you requested on Belarus portal:,. --Redline 07:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a bunch. I left a gift on your talk page as thanks for your efforts. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Zscout370/monobook.js
Hi, I notice you just protected your monobook.js subpage. In case you weren't already aware, user JS and CSS pages are by default only editable by the user to whom they belong and administrators, regardless of whether the user is an administrator themselves. Full protection of such a page is therefore not strictly necessary, as it has no effect (beyond preventing the user themselves from editing it if they are not an administrator, which does not apply in this case). Just to let you know – Qxz 08:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for the heads up. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Rain check
I need to think about this. I've just been reading the previous FAC (after making my own notes; and I fear you will find me a second Tony). Some of his criticisms have still not been addressed: for example, you can't write about countries without knowing whether they are singular or plural (I say singular). The other thing is that I have a list of actionable points, but they are only the tip of the iceberg, and so my criticisms can't really be ticked off, as such, because, like dragon's teeth, more will spring out of the ground. I would much rather assist with the article, at a friendlier moment, when FA status isn't at stake.

Here's a taste of the notes I have made, for example:

This foxed me: ''In the early parts of the This personal union eventually resulted in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, a federation created in 1569. The Muscovites, lead by Tsar Ivan the III, began military conquests in 1486 to try and gain the Kievan Rus' lands, specifically Belarus and Ukraine.'' To me, that needs more than copyediting; it needs rethinking. (Tricky stuff, I know; but for a start, we're talking former Kievan Rus' And there were a series of unions—and the significance of the Union of Kreva is disputed.)


 * In the following, I'm thinking, whoa, slow down...

''In September 1939, as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the Soviet Union invaded Poland and annexed its eastern lands, including majority of Polish-held Byelorussian land.[15] In 1941, Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. Byelorussia was occupied....''

The article there skates over the first unification of eastern and western Belarus into one republic! Highly significant, surely, since the independent country grew out of that republic.

And lots of bad, unhelpful prose, such as:

Belarus has been increasing their cooperation with African, Middle Eastern and Asia.

Some of the organizations Belarus has membership include the CIS, the Eurasian Economic Community, the Collective Security Treaty Organization.

qp10qp 23:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If I can be honest, your welcome to help start on this now, since I pretty much know FA has been lost. Since Belarus, sadly, is yet another one man job done by me, there is a lot of things I really stink at. Grammar is a problem I have the most. I am in still in the process of expanding the history section, so once it has been expanded enough, then I will try and tinker around with the wording of the section. Thanks again. (As for you being another Tony, he did a lot to keep me in check on featured articles, but you are being pretty calm and civil, which is all I ask for in editors.) User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Philippine National Anthem
Why did you delete the link I put in the page for the Philippine National Anthem? Inkan1969 19:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * We generally do not host YouTube links due to copyright issues. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * O.K. I'll look for a non YouTube vocal link.  Or maybe someone can add a vocal .ogg file to go with the instrumental .ogg file? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Inkan1969 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Already two steps ahead of you: I am in the process of getting vocal recordings we can use. You can talk to the folks at WP:PINOY to see some of the details. I still need to convert the files to OGG, but I am waiting for the vinyl recordings to be copied. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize for any trouble I might've caused you. While you're at it you might want to find a vocal recording for the Uzbekistan national anthem to replace the youtube link you deleted.  And if you happen to find other Anthem pages with youtube links, and those links are the only vocal links on those pages, would you consider replacing them with usable vocal recordings instead of just deleting them and leaving nothing?  Thanks. Inkan1969 20:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem with that request is this: we cannot just randomly link to mp3 files too. Plus, many of the vocal recordings have some copyright issues, so it would not bear fruit to upload them. I have a recording of the Uzbek anthem, and I think their symbols are PD, so I can see what I can do with that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Serbian flags
I uploaded the PNG versions, see Image:Standard of the President of Serbia.png and Image:Standard of the President of the National Assembly of Serbia.png. I would still feel more comfortable if it would be possible to fix existing SVGs instead of making them from scratch though. Nikola 20:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I tried to fix the SVG files that you have done, but they crashed my computer a few times. Even the ones that I did myself causes my computer to crash (to the point where I had to do data recovery). We can use the PNG's for now, there is no hurry to get to SVG, since I need to find someone who has a higher memory to do these images. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

just a sharing
FYI, pls read this --Ate Pinay  (talk•email) 06:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Belarus audio file
Here are two files you requested on Belarus portal:,. --Redline 07:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a bunch. I left a gift on your talk page as thanks for your efforts. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Zscout370/monobook.js
Hi, I notice you just protected your monobook.js subpage. In case you weren't already aware, user JS and CSS pages are by default only editable by the user to whom they belong and administrators, regardless of whether the user is an administrator themselves. Full protection of such a page is therefore not strictly necessary, as it has no effect (beyond preventing the user themselves from editing it if they are not an administrator, which does not apply in this case). Just to let you know – Qxz 08:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for the heads up. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Rain check
I need to think about this. I've just been reading the previous FAC (after making my own notes; and I fear you will find me a second Tony). Some of his criticisms have still not been addressed: for example, you can't write about countries without knowing whether they are singular or plural (I say singular). The other thing is that I have a list of actionable points, but they are only the tip of the iceberg, and so my criticisms can't really be ticked off, as such, because, like dragon's teeth, more will spring out of the ground. I would much rather assist with the article, at a friendlier moment, when FA status isn't at stake.

Here's a taste of the notes I have made, for example:

This foxed me: ''In the early parts of the This personal union eventually resulted in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, a federation created in 1569. The Muscovites, lead by Tsar Ivan the III, began military conquests in 1486 to try and gain the Kievan Rus' lands, specifically Belarus and Ukraine.'' To me, that needs more than copyediting; it needs rethinking. (Tricky stuff, I know; but for a start, we're talking former Kievan Rus' And there were a series of unions—and the significance of the Union of Kreva is disputed.)


 * In the following, I'm thinking, whoa, slow down...

''In September 1939, as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the Soviet Union invaded Poland and annexed its eastern lands, including majority of Polish-held Byelorussian land.[15] In 1941, Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. Byelorussia was occupied....''

The article there skates over the first unification of eastern and western Belarus into one republic! Highly significant, surely, since the independent country grew out of that republic.

And lots of bad, unhelpful prose, such as:

Belarus has been increasing their cooperation with African, Middle Eastern and Asia.

Some of the organizations Belarus has membership include the CIS, the Eurasian Economic Community, the Collective Security Treaty Organization.

qp10qp 23:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If I can be honest, your welcome to help start on this now, since I pretty much know FA has been lost. Since Belarus, sadly, is yet another one man job done by me, there is a lot of things I really stink at. Grammar is a problem I have the most. I am in still in the process of expanding the history section, so once it has been expanded enough, then I will try and tinker around with the wording of the section. Thanks again. (As for you being another Tony, he did a lot to keep me in check on featured articles, but you are being pretty calm and civil, which is all I ask for in editors.) User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Userpage
I'm sorry, but protecting my user page? That's a good joke. Replay7 22:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Until you promise me and Wikipedia to stop adding your date of birth and exact geographical location, the page will still be locked from you editing it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

TV Logos/Decorations
Most are saying that the little ABC or NBC logos are a violation of fair-use, which I think is bull and if they are decoration, the little country flags would have to go as well. I would like to purpose (but am not sure as to how) new and very specific rules about fair-use logos, pictures, etc, and decorative images (like the ABC, etc logos and country flags). - SVRTVDude (Yell - Toil) 02:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The policies we have right now on Fair use do not want the use of fair use images to be used for decorative purposes. The difference with the flag images is that they are public domain or under a free license, like the Creative Commons. There was a group of folks who want the flag images to be removed from infoboxes, but I need to find that link again. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * See, my opinion (and I know what they say about opinions :o)) is that if they are used on the main page (ie: CBS) that they should be used in small form on the TV station pages. But I understand that things could get nuts.  You open the door and there will be a tiny logo for everything.  Now, like the ownership, I think that is pushing it, but with the network, 100000watts.com kinda started that and it makes it easier on the eye and quicker to see.  Little ABC logo, you know it's an ABC station, you won't have to look for the tiny Wiki link and for some that might be a good thing (hard of seeing, etc).  But, I think it adds to the page.


 * I guess there could be a revision of the fair-use rules that would allow only network logos 50px and smaller for TV station pages and exclude the ownership logos and any others. But that is just one editor's opinion. - SVRTVDude (Yell - Toil) 02:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the other editors will disagree with you. While some other websites, like 100000watts.com, have their own policies, I am not sure if their main goal is to have their website published worldwide. I still think many of the tiny logos in the infoboxes are a big strange (I see a tiny image in the Belarus infobox, but I can't take it out because of a wikiproject standard), so you are correct about folks doing it once and it explodes everywhere. While, I can see why the logos can be used, since there are many TV stations called ABC, so some wish to use a logo to say if it is the America, Australian or Philippines based station. But, under our fair use policy, the logos are meerly seen as decoration when used for the purposes that you wished to have them used. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

discussion on fair use images in portals
there is currently a proposed amendment to include fair use images in the portal space at Fair use/Amendment/Fair use images in portals2. I have decided to contact you because you expressed interest in this topic in the past. Please know that I am contacting all editors who partipated in discussions regarding this at WT:FUC. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 22:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Featured article review/History of Poland (1945–1989)
Since you voted during FAC and you are familiar with the region/period, perhaps you'd like to comment and/or help improve the article?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Belarusian flag finial.svg
Hello Zscout370, would you please copy Image:Belarusian flag finial.svg to Commons, so other projects can use this file? (My computer does not support SVG files on harddisk, so I can't fix it.) Thank you in anticipation, NL-Ninane 12:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 15:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. NL-Ninane 16:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Alexander Lukashenko Mogilev visit.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Alexander Lukashenko Mogilev visit.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Alexander Lukashenko Mogilev visit.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Alexander Lukashenko Mogilev visit.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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. —Angr 18:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Alexander Lukashenko Mogilev visit.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Alexander Lukashenko Mogilev visit.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. —Angr 18:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Global Country of World Peace
I've been working on this article, but you deleted it because you felt it was spam. Is there any chance I could get the text back so I can improve it? Thanks! --Sueyen 20:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I will look into it. But your also welcome to create it from scratch. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You mean start all over again?--Sueyen 18:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, what I was thinking for now is to make the article a stub, just a few lines. Then, I can restore the text and see what can be added back in or what should stay out. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Looking forward to it. --Sueyen 19:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Text restored, since I think the redirect is alright for now. There is no hurry or time limit to complete it in. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!Sueyen 01:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award
 For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award originated by Pedia-I (Explanation and Disclaimer) ♠ <font face="Old English Text MT"> TomasBat  ( @ )  ( Contribs )  ( Sign! ) 21:21, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Belorussia vs. Byelorussia, pre-SSR
("Return fire" -- how could I resist?! :-) Apropos your comment to my query about the English-language spelling of names for the area during the Russian Empire: I've only just encountered this material, and it's far too soon for me to form an informed opinion. Am waiting for the pundits to weigh in — is there a forum you might suggest alerting? I'd thought of posting a head's up on the Humanities Reference Desk or even the Language RD. The editing task is for an extra-Wikipedia assignment, but of course there can be applications here too. Further advice welcome. -- Deborahjay 16:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe those are good places to bring it up, since there is only a few people who edit Belarusian topics, so it would be good to have the community at large look at it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I've just posted a query on the Language Ref Desk — but what I don't understand is where on the pages of the Russian History WikiProject I might indicate the need for input from knowledgeable users. (Its Talk page seems to be primarily for discussion of the Project among its participants.) I'd appreciate guidance there —  Thanks, Deborahjay 05:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and use the talk page of the project, I am sure the folks will not mind at all. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Done! :-)  Deborahjay 06:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Imperial triple crown jewels


Here are your jewels, your imperial majesty. :) Durova Charge! 00:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! :) User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Responses to this award have been enthusiastic so I've dropped a note at the Signpost tipline. I've identified you as the first recipient.  Durova Charge! 02:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * blush I'm honored. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Adminship
While I know you admin the Commons and be-x-old.wikipedia, do you wish to become an admin here? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for proposal! Unfortunately, I simply doesn't have time for that :-( And I don't think that I'm right person for this role: adminship here (as in every big Wikipedia) requires too much bureaucracy and politics on my mind...--EugeneZelenko 14:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Adminship
While I know you admin the Commons and be-x-old.wikipedia, do you wish to become an admin here? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for proposal! Unfortunately, I simply doesn't have time for that :-( And I don't think that I'm right person for this role: adminship here (as in every big Wikipedia) requires too much bureaucracy and politics on my mind...--EugeneZelenko 14:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Orbicle indefblock
It would seem to be appropriate to notify Orbicle that s/he has be indefinitely blocked about now, no? --Iamunknown 04:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Runjanin
So you had an edit war? What does have to do with me, or the article today? There is no reason not to include more information. As far as I can see, the only reason is narrow minded xenophobia, as demonstrated in a pretty offensive tirade, for which you thanked the author (hopefully merely due to a lack of acquaintance with the subject matter). If you have some real arguments, then I'll be more than happy to discuss them, despite the ridiculousness and pettiness of the whole issue.--Methodius 15:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem was that the kind of information you added to the article, that was caused the last edit wars (which I had to mediate). Personally, at the way the article is right now, it would not be a good idea to add the information that Runjanin is a Serb. If the article was expanded, sure, I can see why it could be added. But, information like that should be focused at Runjanin's article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Belarus Wikiproject, old stuff
Brother Zachary! What would you think of the idea of a separate Belarus Wikiproject, and do you think there would be much support?
 * Also, have you had any success with the Scout graphics from Christmastime? Thanks, yours in Scouting, Chris 21:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No, due to the new image licensing scheme by the Foundation. As for the Belarusian Wikiproject, I tried that before but failed. We do have a portal Portal:Belarus and just focus on whatever you like to do. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * What sort of new licensing scheme?
 * What made the project fail? Just too polarized because of politics, or what? I proposed a Ukraine Project and it was up and is running within three days, if I tested the water to see if there would be support, would you be involved?
 * Finally, I got this from a brother there, I don't understand the reason for the removal, but I figure you would be empathetic with the problem. Chris 05:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, you might know the Army slogan "The Army of One." Well, the BY Wikiproject is the "Wikiproject of One." As for the Belarusian Wikipedia, I got those emails a lot because of my work with the Wikimedia OTRS. I am in talks with some folks right now to see if we can get the content restored at a different location. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Spam whitelist - what do you think?
At User:Eagle 101's request, I have gone to various editors seeking a consensus on this discussion, as I personally know the artist whose site it is - therefore, there is a small issue of WP:COI. Please take a look and leave your thoughts there.--Vox Humana 8&#39; 23:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:PD-India-Gov
Per this discussion. Should the same be done to this template? Since it's obviously not free enough either for wikipedia. Garion96 (talk) 17:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The issue I had with the PH Government template is that it didn't allow for their works to be used commercial. I am not seeing that language in this one, but the no modifications might hurt us with this one. I'll ask around and get back to you. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking. I'm not that sorry, I thought the same but wanted confirmation to be sure. Do the same as with the philippines tag, redirect to Template:No license? Garion96 (talk) 18:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Tobias Conradi block
You just blocked the user indefinitely per the WP:CSN board's decision, but from reading (and participating) in the discussion regarding possible sanctions that it would be a promise not to recreate the material (did he do that again?), and up to a week's block for violations of WP:CIVIL, with escalating blocks after the 2nd. Just looking for clarification for the block (he's not helping himself by immediately editing under the IP address), but just looking for clarification. Thanks! SirFozzie 01:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yall wanted to try a civility parole, but since he seems to wanting to break it hours after it was suggested, I deemed him persona non grata based on his prior behavior and the way he pretty much will disregard the project, thus, issuing the indef block. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No Problem :) Just a bit confusing to see the CSN discussion referenced in the block log, when that was not what consensus was at the time. Sorry for bothering you! SirFozzie 01:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Zscout... I'd have let this run a bit longer. But I won't overturn unless consensus at Community_sanction_noticeboard seems very clear. ++Lar: t/c 11:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You should be aware that there is further discussion on AN and on CN about this, you really ought to turn up and speak to what the circumstances were. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 12:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I spoke to the CN. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 15:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Tobias Conradi
Hi, as you've been involved in blocking or unblocking Tobias Conradi during the past six months or so, I'm making this courtesy edit on your talk page to notify you that there has recently been an inconclusive community sanction discussion, and I have taken this to arbitration. --Tony Sidaway 15:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I saw it on the Noitceboards, but thanks for the heads up. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Salting of [[Image:Virginia massacre.jpg]]
This image was inappropriately uploaded before without a proper fair-use rationale, and was rightly deleted. However, I feel that it can fall under fair use guidelines as an irreplaceable picture illustrating this event firsthand, as per Image:West entrance.jpg and Image:VictimLibraryWindowColumbine.jpg, similar fair-use pictures used to illustrate Columbine High School massacre. Would you be willing to unsalt the page given the following fair-use rationale?

Thank you for your time. Krimpet (talk/review) 05:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No; it violated the US law on fair use. There is a set of tests that the image must pass. Currently, the image fails the 4th test, since news organizations are using the photo for commercial purposes. If we use it now, one day after the event, the commercial use of the image will be undercut, thus not fair use. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * By that reasoning though, wouldn't Image:Cho Seung-hui 3.jpg violate the fair use test too? It's being distributed by news organizations for commercial purposes in the same exact manner. Krimpet (talk/review) 07:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes. As for the Columbine photos, the event occured long ago, so the commercial use of the photos will not be affected buy us using them. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The Collegiate Times does not own this photograph. A Virginia Tech freshman student who took it on his cell phone owns it. Contrary to the proposed rationale above, he does not work for the CT. Based on his willingness to share it with others, I have little doubt that he would be willing to release it under a GFDL if asked, but I have been hesitant to do so for obvious reasons - do we really want to be emailing traumatized students? At any rate, while I fully agree 100% that all news media photos should be deleted on sight, this one is not a news media photo - it is an individual's photo that a news media agency was using with his permission. At any rate, salting it when the only uploader is an admin is somewhat of an overkill. I request that you reconsider your deletion of the image. Thank you. --BigDT ( 416 ) 22:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:Virginia massacre.jpg. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. BigDT ( 416 ) 00:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Responded there. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, against my better judgment, I have emailed the photographer and asked if he would be willing to release the image under the GFDL. My one foray into asking a student to release photos of the vigil @Tech was successful ... so who knows let's hope for 2/2. The main picture right now on Wikinews was taken by a student at Tech. Obviously, as we all would, I would love to have this image released under a free license. I have no idea if that will happen, though. --BigDT ( 416 ) 01:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If you needed time to ask for the image, that is fine. At least you are getting the hints I am trying to drop; we want to have free content and just having fair use after fair use photo on the article is not a way we should try to present ourselves to the world on such a high profile article as that now. I also let folks at Wikinews know that we need a better licensed photo of the shooter, since I still feel uneasy snipping the photo from the AP/Fox News. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Let me run this by you. The photographer replied to my email, said that he loves Wikipedia and would love for us to use his pic, and said he would release it under the GFDL and even copied/pasted the GFDL text from the image tag. However, he has added this requirement to the end of the email: "I am a full proponent of Wikipedia and would love to have my picture included on the website, provided my full name, William Chase Damiano, is incorporated into the image or used as a caption." A watermark is out of the question. I looked through our policies and couldn't find one specifically on caption credits. Is that an acceptable requirement? I asked him if he would be willing to waive it, at least for Wikimedia, as it would be virtually impossible to enforce with other languages. --BigDT ( 416 ) 02:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry to pop in. You could create a GFDL image copyright tag that states "Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with the Invariant Sections being just "Photograph by William Chase Damiano", with no Front-Cover Texts, and with no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "GNU Free Documentation License"."  The Invariant Section would legally have to stay with the photograph in any GFDL reproduction of it and could effectively act as a byline (though it would not force the redistributer to format it as a byline).  --Iamunknown 02:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I don't even think we need to go that far. I don't know chapter and verse off hand, but I think the GFDL requires you to maintain copyright statements, so a copyright statement on the description page has to be maintained anyway, right? But the requirement that I don't know that we can live with is that his name be used as a caption. --BigDT ( 416 ) 02:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Pretty much, another way you can do it is forward the email to WP:OTRS and I can tag the image as OTRS Confirmed and we can put the above what Iamunknown wrote. As long as we got the permission, the license and the conditions, and all of the conditions you stated are acceptable for Wikipedia, we can use it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok ... it's uploaded as Image:Virginia Tech massacre Damiano photo from Holden Hall.jpg. I have forwarded the email to en-permissions. --BigDT ( 416 ) 03:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Works for me. I'll add the template tomorrow morning. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cho Seung-hui 3.jpg
Hello, Zach! I noticed that you deleted Image:Cho Seung-hui 3.jpg (per the above). I'm hoping that you could explain in greater detail why the fair use rationale was invalid. (I'm not a copyright expert, so please bear with me.)

You seem to imply above that we have a legal obligation to not compete with commercial entities, but I've only seen that concept applied to photographs that belong to the commercial entities themselves. In other words, press agencies own the copyrights and sell publication rights to affiliated news organizations (or the actual news organizations own the photographs outright).

Why would this concept apply to a photograph supplied by a police department (for which no member of the press owns the copyright)? Why do profit-making entities have a special legal entitlement to make a fair use claim that we can't? It's been suggested that the rationale ordinarily applied to mugshots applies here.

Thanks for your time! —David Levy 13:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Mugshots are copyrighted unless otherwise stated. In Virginia, unless there is something I have not found yet, the mugshots are copyrighted. If we got the photo ourselves from the Police Department, then it would be fine, since it is coming from the source. But if we take it from the AP, then it would not be good. Plus, as I told the user above, since the event just happened two days ago, we cannot automatically claim fair use on something. Give it a few months, and once the clamor subsides, we could claim fair use. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 15:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, mugshots usually are copyrighted, but we can claim fair use. That's my point.
 * Under the fair use doctrine, we cannot publish a copyrighted image if this will substantially reduce its value to the copyright holder. The news organizations do not hold this image's copyright.  They're claiming fair use, and we have as much right as they have.
 * It makes absolutely no difference whether we received the file directly from the Virginia State Police (which released the image for this purpose) or from a news organization. The latter holds no copyright and cannot generate one by simply publishing the image.
 * I don't understand your argument about the event's recentness at all. What bearing does that have?  The photograph will still be copyrighted in "a few months," and its subject won't be any deader than he is now.  —David Levy 15:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * In a few months time, the press agencies will not be selling the photos, so the market value of the image will have been exhausted. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, the press agencies do not own the image in question. They possess no exclusivity, and their ability to sell it is not our concern.  —David Levy 19:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I found this on the website of the Virginia State Police: "MEDIA making inquires regarding the Virginia Tech incident should call the Virginia Tech Media Line at (540) 231-5396 or visit their Web site at http://www.vt.edu/." Maybe we could ask the VTML and see if they could release us photographs of the shooting, in partiuclar, the shooter. If we can get it directly from the source, then I will stop my persuit about the image. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


 * That would be of benefit only if the copyright holder agrees to release the image(s) under a free license. You're welcome to try.  —David Levy 00:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Probably due to my location and schedule, I am giving this task to Wikinews. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Orbicle's request for unblocking
Hello, Zscout. I hope you don't mind if I ask you to take another look at the case of User:Orbicle, whom you blocked indefinitely for copyright violations. I'm hoping that some administrator will agree to unblock him, but I feel it's courteous to ask you, as you were the one who placed the initial block. Please don't think I don't take copyright seriously. I do, and was in fact involved in cleaning up part of the mess, at Jkelly's request. I just don't think that Orbicle was fully aware of how important our copyright policy is. There are people who imagine that if something is published on the internet, it's "up for grabs", so to speak. At the very least, I think we could say that he was surely motivated by a desire to improve the quality of the encyclopaedia, and not by a desire to get the Foundation involved in some messy lawsuit! This case was discussed at the Admin noticeboard, but was then archived, and I feel that Orbicle may have been simply forgotten. It was also discussed here at the WikiProject Opera talk page, as I was modifying some of Orbicle's edits, and someone wanted to know why. People felt there that he had done good work, apart from this serious violation, and that it would be a pity to leave him blocked permanently. An administrator turned down his request for an unblock, and then there was silence. I don't know if admins are watching his page. I left a message for him, suggesting that linking to the page at Meta about avoiding copyright paranoia was not the best way to ask for an unblock. Next time he logged on, which was quite recently, he removed it. He didn't attempt to replace the unblock request template after his request was denied, but I'd like you to consider unblocking him now that the mess has been cleaned up. I really don't think there's any danger that he'll copy sources into Wikipedia again, and a lot of the work that he did was untainted. There were stubs and disambiguation pages that I think could only have been original. I'm sure he'd be prepared to promise to follow our copyright policy in future, but I hate to see people forced to grovel, and I think if he made that promise, it should be enough. I suppose it's not actually necessary for him to agree with all the policies in order to be a productive Wikipedian. It should be enough simply to follow them. Thanks for your consideration. Cheers. ElinorD (talk) 23:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't want to nag, but . . . any chance that you'd consider it? I really don't think that further copyright violations are likely? ElinorD (talk) 15:31, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiCAst- FA summaries..
Hi, Sorry to be a pain, but way-back you taped some Featured Article summaries for WikiCast. The summaries I think if taken from En would "in the orginal" be GFDL. A recording of them would might also thus need to be GFDL.

Can you clarify this or amend the license for the files on commons? ShakespeareFan00 17:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, if they are no longer needed, just delete them. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Problem is, they may still be of use, I would strongly recommend changing them to GFDL license, which resolves the issue ShakespeareFan00 14:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * How? They are months old. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Programme archive - WikiCast may wish to use them again :-) ShakespeareFan00 21:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Africa
Are you sure it needs full protection? Picaroon 04:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah. It was put under semi protection and that crap still happened. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Redirect reverted
Just to let you know, I reverted your redirect of Margaret Tyndal Winthrop here. In future, if you redirect like that, please merge the information back to the John Kerry article. In my opinion, a redirect is not justified, because she has links going both ways, to John Winthrop, Robert Charles Winthrop, and James Bowdoin. Do you mention her in all these articles? Unless you create a family article, like Dudley-Winthrop family, it is best to leave these as separate articles for now. Carcharoth 12:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The reason why I made the redirect because of an OTRS email we got over the article and the contents. I'll will look at the contents later and see what to do next, if anything. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 15:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, lets go with the merge. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 15:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry. Didn't realise it was an OTRS e-mail. A complaint, I assume. Are you allowed to note that in the edit summary? FWIW, there are a number of article like that one, split out from John Kerry. See also: Articles for deletion/Vanessa Kerry (daughter) and Talk:Peggy Kerry (sister). His brother is Cameron Kerry and his father is Richard Kerry and his mother is Rosemary Forbes Kerry. All a bit inconsistent really, but if you do any more merging, I only ask that you copy the information into the destination article and note the original article in the edit summary, so that people know where the new text has come from. Carcharoth 18:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks a bunch. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:26, 22 April 2007 (UTC)