User talk:Holly Cheng/Archive13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

My Image

On the cat page article it was said my image of a female dilute tortoiseshell & white cat was removed because there was another picture of that same coat pattern. If you would, please show me a second image on that page of a dilute tortoiseshell & white cat. Taya540 (talk) 02:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at

User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 17:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Concern

I am concerned by this edit [1] and the edit summary which accompanied it. It does not strike me as appropriate behaviour for an admin. DuncanHill (talk) 21:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe ...
chat} 21:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
One reason it took me so long is that I found it hard to believe! Thanks for the explanation. DuncanHill (talk) 21:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
he he!! What if I refute :p Prashanthns (talk) 21:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket#2008041810018711

Regarding Quakerwildcat (talk · contribs)'s uploads, he grants permission to release his pics under "CC-2.5" (meaning cc-by-2.5) on Wikipedia. I understand that it's not acceptable for the copyright holder to only allow "use on Wikipedia". But by adding the {{cc-by-2.5}} template, doesn't that put his pics under the terms of the license regardless of his statement? Spellcast (talk) 01:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it's best not to piss off our contributors on the chance that there may be a miscommunication. What I'm trying to avoid is the situation where later he realizes that CC-BY-2.5 means everyone and he says, "That's not what I meant!" and we reply with "Too bad you didn't read the fine print." A little clarity goes a long way, if you see what I mean. Thanks.
chat} 02:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Would kind of email response would you recommend in this situation? Spellcast (talk) 06:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"You wrote on your image pages, 'Permission is granted by the author Scott Ableman to use this photo on Wikipedia under a CC-2.5. Any other use requires permission from the author and a link back to the author's flickr page.' I want you to understand that the Attribution license applies to everyone and not just Wikipedia. As such, the second sentence, "Any other use requires permission" needs to be removed. If you are uncomfortable with these terms, I understand and will arrange to have the images deleted. Please let me know." That's what I'd write.
chat} 16:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Re Tailings and Mullock

Hi Howcheng,

Look, I'm no mining expert, not by a longshot, but when I was putting those images into the articles and touching up the articles I looked into the mullock vs tailings issue. The thing was, at Broken Hill they clearly described these as mullock heaps, even though they used the term tailings for other things, but I originally thought it must just be another name for tailings, a term I was already familiar with (I even wondered whether it was just a particularly Australian mining term for tailings - there's even a creek called Mullocky Creek near where I live). When I looked at the mullock or mullock heap article to try to clarify I found we had no such thing (wondered about creating it).

The point is when I looked them up further I felt that they are actually different things, which is why I kept the term mullock in the caption, etc, rather than using tailings. As best I can tell, tailings is largely used to describe waste products from mining operations, that are often toxic - from the article "...the materials left over after the process of separating the valuable fraction from the worthless fraction of an ore". Mullock by contrast seemed to be used to mainly describe the excess rock that had been dug out to get to the useful ore-bodies (see here for a short definition). In other words, as you dug down to get to the ore you'd be left with a lot of waste rock or mullock, then when you processed the actual ore to extract the useful minerals, the leftover waste from that would be tailings. I might be splitting hairs where there's none to be split; I'd really like someone who knew more about mining to clarify. --jjron (talk) 02:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there's a difference, it's very subtle. I found the Tasmanian DPIW which defines a mullock heap as "A pile or hill formed of untreated mining waste" and a tailings dump as an "Accumulation of mine waste", and this PDF from Mineral Resources Tasmania implies that they're the same also. Anyway, I'm going to keep the link to
chat} 04:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Re POTD scheduling

Hi, I had tried to promote Eta Carinae for POTD. I guess I did not understand the rule at first. My Bad. But, how about this image of the Milky way? Thanks. Sumanch (talk) 06:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That one's already been POTD. See
chat} 17:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Kobe Bryant Main Image

I saw you changed the Kobe Bryant image. Although the image you selected may be closer to a

WP:LOTM) 07:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

:)

WilliamH (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

WilliamH (talk) 17:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mary of Teck

Hey Howcheng thanks for notifying me but no, I can't see anything wrong with the caption, it looks good--Hadseys 09:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

?

???!!! How could this be? I thoroughly checked thermae AND Dione, and they both had no featured days. Rj1020 (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Dione one was my fault, since I forgot to mark the POTD date, but the Thermae one was trickier. That FP was a replacement for an older picture. If you look at
chat} 19:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

WP:HAU

Hello again.

The Highly Active Users project has gone through a complete revamping per popular demand. We believe this new format will make it easier for new editors to find assistance. However, with the new format, I must again ask you to verify your information on this page. I attempted to translate the data from the old version to the new, but with the extensive changes, I may have made some errors. Thanks again. Useight (talk) 03:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

POTD June 21, 2008

Hi Howcheng,

Forgive me my ignorance as I am not completely familiar with the POTD circuitry here. June 21 is the national day of Greenland and also the day of year where the midnight sun can be seen from most areas on the northern hemisphere, and I thouhgt it would be good timing if the POTD on June 21 could be an FP from Greenland with midnight sun. What I had in mind is Image:Upernavik_evening_panorama_edit4.jpg. If this is considered too newly nominated, Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 2.jpg is another recent Greenland FP, although it does ot relate to the midnight sun. If this is against some policy just tell me, and I'll forget about it. Cheers, -- Slaunger (talk) 08:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ping. -- Slaunger (talk) 04:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I'll be happy to put that on for June 21.
chat} 07:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
That's great. Thank you. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ping. Just to remind that June 21 is coming up. Cheers, -- Slaunger (talk) 22:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hanini.org images

Hey there. I am told you handled this OTRS ticket authorizing images from hanini.org under CC license. However, I do not believe that hanini.org actually owns the copyright on all but a tiny fraction of the images on the site. I just noticed

tendentious editor. I'm not exactly sure how to proceed here but DanielB advised me on #wikimedia-otrs to inform you. Thanks, <eleland/talkedits> 02:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Hmm, I suppose I should have checked out hanini.org before taking any action on that. Let me know if there's a deletion discussion going on anywhere. Thanks.
chat} 16:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Quickimgdelete

I think a change to the format of image pages may have screwed up your quickimgdelete script - it apparently can't detect the uploader and aborts the script when notification is required. Kelly hi! 02:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is now resolved.
chat} 16:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

POTD

Hey Howcheng Could you kindly arrange for the image Image:Spinning Dancer.gif to appear as the POTD on 11th June? Thanks Muhammad(talk) 16:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason for this date?
chat} 21:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
The reason is kind of funny so I wouldn't like to disclose it. Anyway if it can't be arranged, then thanks for asking :) Muhammad(talk) 12:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I spotted the MacAuthor FP the other day (good caption, by the way) and while admiring the picture it suddenly dawned on me that one of mine was actually featured a little ahead, but wasn't on the main page before this one. The image in question is Image:Japanesesuicide.jpg, which was nominated and closed in late december 2007, whereas these recent ones are from early 2008. Did this one just get overlooked, or was it being saved for something special? TomStar81 (Talk) 05:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, that one. Sorry, I should have told you, but I decided to skip that one. After consulting with other Wikipedians, I came to the conclusion that it was simply too grotesque for the Main Page. We always get complaints when we show dead people (e.g.,
chat} 16:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Ah, I see. That explains a lot. Thanks for the explination. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pasco-Kennewick Bridge (1922)

Updated DYK query On
Pasco-Kennewick Bridge (1922), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page
.

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HAU

Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at

SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Pearl of Allah

Thank you for protecting this page. As you may see Batgirlreturns had made major deletions and changes in the website. I had warned her twice for vandalizing. I request an undo of her last attempt and I honor your decision as to any outcome. --Penquin3 (talk) 20:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really care who is right here. Please, the two of you need to work it out on the talk page and come to some sort of agreement.
chat} 20:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Josh Becker chinstrap photo

Hi howcheng, I've just learned that my photo of Josh Becker and his beard has been deleted because Josh Becker says it is not a photo of him. I'm assuming that the Josh Becker who complained is the horror film director. It is true that my photo is not a photo of him. But it is, in fact, a photo of Josh Becker from Burt, Iowa whom I attend the University of Iowa with. This was clarified in my original caption of the photo, but someone edited it. In relation to the article "chinstrap beard" it is very relevant, although based upon the current definition I feel the photo belongs on the "neck beard" page, if there is one. Thanks! 21:16, June 3 2008.

Actually, your original caption was empty, and all it said was "{{
chat} 03:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Tagging script

Hello, Howcheng! I hope you're fine, long time no seen. A minor edit on your script must be done, it's using {{

Image copyright}} and {{Di-no license-notice}}. Thanks!--OsamaK
10:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

?--OsamaK 17:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!--OsamaK 11:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

George Washington

If you have a chance, check out George Washington. I've helped upload the recorded version; if you've done this sort of thing before, please let me know if I've done it right. P.S. This guy has a really great voice!) - Nunh-huh 01:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually never done this before, but I just followed the procedures at
chat} 04:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Spoken article

Everything looks just fine for the upload and inclusion of the soundfile for George Washington. Well done it is too. However, a few technical nitpicks. The opening statements are helpful for the visually impaired and general ease of use (i.e. "Article name, from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, at E N dot wikipedia dot org."). The only other issue is missing the license statement at the end of the article ("This sound file and all text in the article are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, available at www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html")

Beyond those points, everything is perfect. Thanks him for his contribution and your efforts in posting and we hope to see more in the future. I've also noted you inclusion for a request for review. One of us should get to it shortly for additional feedback. Cheers.

Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images/2008_June_6#Image:Villianc.svg

With all respect, your speedy close was flawed. First, the image is on Wikipedia and should be deleted from Wikipedia. Second, it is a licensed cartoon character with a skin colour change, a blatant copyright violation of a licensed character. Please reopen the discussion, thanks. All the best, Gwen Gale (talk) 00:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the image is on Commons. I don't see why you think it's on Wikipedia. See the log -- it has never been uploaded here.
chat} 00:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Ok, first, I now understand the rationale as to why it's not a copy vio, so never mind on that. But second, I see the log, so I'm muddled now: This is the first Commons image I ever ran across with a delete tab (which is why I thought it was here). What am I not getting? Is the delete tab only for a template? Gwen Gale (talk) 00:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page is here (because of the FPC templates) but the image isn't. Confusing, I know. Kelly hi! 00:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Thanks for the FYI about the Korean rail car image. I have a request for you though, if its not too much trouble: Could Image:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima (color).ogg go up as the FP on July 4? The date and the image are pretty much perfect for each other, and hence the request. TomStar81 (Talk) 09:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I apreciate it. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of Romancing SaGa characters

List of Romancing SaGa characters, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Romancing SaGa characters. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

POTD notification

Thanks for the note... Cheers!

talk) 05:41, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Respiratory System

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Respiratory_system&diff=218656810&oldid=218172685 I have some concerns in placing the image at this point into be in Respiratory System article. In particular the fact that their may be some mistakes... nevertheless it does portray a respiratory system. Could we compromise and place the image with only number for now? Please take a look at the corresponding talk page before putting this image in any other article. (late signature) --CyclePat (talk) 22:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Medal

The 50 DYK Medal   
Seems like someone forgot to award you this, I'm sure you should have received it long ago. Well done Howcheng! Your contributions at DYK are always appreciated. Gatoclass (talk) 23:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I'm only at 49. :)
chat} 23:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Well someone's messed up, because according to the DYK Hall of Fame you have 58 already! Gatoclass (talk) 09:03, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that number includes nominations. I have 49 of my own articles that made it to DYK.
chat} 03:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Yes, but noms count the same as creations. Look at PFHLai, he has all four DYK medals but he's only ever created one article. The other 200+ are all noms :) Gatoclass (talk) 13:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I think he deserves it!
I wonder if there is a pic. of doggie doo doo... :(

BlueJayLover123 :  Chat  12:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kress house pic

I replied at my Talk page. doncram (talk) 18:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spinoff

Hi Howcheng FYI i have a different view on it, see User_talk:Mion#Spinoff. Cheers Mion (talk) 19:56, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probable maximum loss

Have reverted your recent reversion of my edits. The content you restored is almost all a copyright violation of http://www.sebench.com/Services/tabid/56/Default.aspx Dpmuk (talk) 16:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Engraving/Woodcut from 1874

Hi Howcheng! When you get some time, would you mind checking my work on an image upload you were kind enough to answer some questions about over on Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions? The image is HERE and I haven't embedded it into any articles yet. As I said on the question page, it is over 100 years old and a faithful reproduction, so I believe it excludes copyright. However, as I said, the image source is claiming copyright and associated fees. They are based out of Japan, not USA, so perhaps that might have something to with it. I really don't know, but since this is the first time I've uploaded an image, I think it would be a good idea to have an admin like yourself take a look. If for some reason it is in violation, please take appropriate action. Thanks! --Trippz (talk) 12:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only worrisome thing I found is the licensing tag. I changed it to PD-art-life-70, but it would be nice to find out when the artist died to be sure.
chat} 16:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Great! PD-art-life-70 works for me. Can't really find much on the artist, but PD70 does the job. Thanks for your help! --Trippz (talk) 15:38, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Image:Image:" Problem

Hello, Howcheng! Could you please check this edit. It writes double "Image:Image:", maybe because it uses {{Di-no source-notice|Image:Something}}. Can you fix it?--OsamaK 12:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really wish these templates would be consistent. Some of them require the namespace, some don't. This is fixed.
chat} 16:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Fair Use Question

Hi there. I have a question on fair use. I was recently looking at the fair use image Image:TheRingworldEngineers.jpg. I noticed that the image was a little washed out and needed to be fixed;however, its fair use and im not sure if i can. Could you please help me on this? I read the Fair Use page, but couldnt discern if i could fix the washout (It may just be that im not looking hard enough x.x its been a long day at work heeh). Thanks so much! Dillard421 (talk • contribs) 03:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's perfectly fine to do. Simple technical corrections are not really considered derivative works or anything like that.
chat} 16:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Awesome! Thanks so much! :) Dillard421 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huli Haroli

Hi Howcheng

I am new to Wikipedia and I am not sure what to do now based on the comments made on the Haroli article I wrote and on which you commented.

Go ahead and delete the Haroli article or let me know what to do next. I will be glad to work on the Huli page.

I lived among the Huli in their main city of Tari and in men's houses throughout the surrounding area (the Huli do not have villages) and have studied their culture so I feel I have the credentials to write it.

I would like to focus on Huli myths, rituals and symbols as they make the Huli unique and notable, while the current content of the stub is not notable as most PNG cultures have the same or similar social structure.

Thanks much Haroli (talk) 04:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For your tireless efforts in gathering images for the List of crossings of the Columbia River. Pete (talk), July 2008

Oh, and I will see about getting a photo of the BNSF bridge in Portland sometime this summer. -Pete (talk) 17:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Image:FLR.jpg

Thank you for the catch. I went ahead and deleted it as requested and replaced the image with the proper one in all of the other related articles. See you around Tony the Marine (talk) 00:18, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HAU, Status, and you!

As you may know, the StatusBot responsible for maintaining the status of the

Qui status system. This semi-automatic system will allow you to easily update your status page found at Special:Mypage/Status which the HAU page code is now designed to read from. If you are already using Qui (or a compatible) system - great! - no action is needed (other than remembering to update your status as necessary). If not, consider installing Qui. You can also manually update this status by changing the page text to online, offline, or busy. While it is not mandatory, the nature of HAU is that people are often seeking a quick answer from someone who is online and keeping our statuses up-to-date will assist with this. Note if you were previously using your /Status page as something other than a one-word status indicator, your HAU entry may have been set to "status=n" to correct display issues. Please clear this parameter if you change things to be "HAU compatible". Further questions can be raised at WT:HAU. This message was delivered by xenobot 22:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

US centric TFP

Can we stop having US centric images as (To)day's Featured Pictures, especially US military history? It's been a bit much lately. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 14:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, POTD is selected from the list of Featured Pictures in the order they were promoted. As it happens, there were a glut of U.S.–related ones right in a row. I always break up "themes" (e.g., insects, birds, similiar topics), but I haven't been doing it for country of origin. I can try, but since the U.S. government is such a huge repository of free media, it may not be realistically possible.
chat} 16:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

July 10 DYK

Updated DYK query On
10 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Columbus Monument, Barcelona, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page
.

--Bedford Pray 05:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FS

Hi! I believe you're largely responsible for the featured picture section of the main page. I just wanted to ask if there's any chance in splicing in the (much rarer) featured sounds as well. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 21:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

restored multimeter and air-compressor images with appropriate licensing

Thank you very much Sir! I couldn't thank you before and the section of the media copyright questions is already archived, so I do it here. --Bougainville (talk) 10:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Menudo (band)

The image link that you added doesn't appear to be working, is this a Commons file? - Caribbean~H.Q. 21:55, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was. Apparently it got deleted for being a corrupt image, but it was working fine for me... I'll investigate.
chat} 21:58, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
OK, I think this is fixed now.
chat} 22:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Yeah, everything looks good now. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:21, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A {{
imagevio
}} bug

Hello, Howcheng! When you see my comments, you shouldn't think anything but reporting bug :P. When using "Copyright violation" the script adds {{imagevio|1=undefined}} to image page and the correct URL at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. You can see this edit on image page, and that one on reporting page; Check this one also. Hope to be fixed, Thank you!--OsamaK 20:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this is a really very extremely old reporting. :) Please read this comment and remove that historical function. --OsamaKReply? on my talk page, please 02:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Patty Hearst.jpg

The copyright holder and source is the Symbionese Liberation Army, an entity that no longer exists. This image is widely available on many different websites. This info is already on the image description page so I don't know what else is needed. --mav (talk) 16:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also concerned that this image doesn't meet
chat} 17:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
I don't see this as a copyright issue since the source and owner are given along with a fair use rationale. I believe you intend to challenge the fair use rationale. But that is a different process. Either way, each use of the image also needs to be appropriately tagged where it is in the article so that the readers/editors of those articles are also made aware of this challenge. --mav (talk) 17:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, initially it was just a drive-by no source tagging, but now that I was looking into it deeper, I came across the other issues.
chat} 17:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Drive-bys often kill innocent by-standers. :) Please re-tag the image page and the captions with the appropriate templates. I think that the major issue is the use of that particular image as the main one for the Patty Hearst infobox. That seems POV to me and I think that another image (not the one you cite, since it is very fuzzy and also has POV issues) would be better for the infobox. As for rationale, the current size of the Patty Hearst article and the existence of a free image showing her SLA activity, I think that our fair use rationale is weak for that article. However, the rationale, I think, is much stronger for use in the SLA article for the reasons given on the image page. --mav (talk) 18:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IFD images

I just tagged them as IFD just in case the uploaders still had local copies laying around and give them a chance to re-upload first. Q T C 21:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

bridge collapse photos

Hey does your friend have any photos of Minneapolis Police at the site or any pictures showing local law enforcement. That would be great to use. .:davumaya:. 06:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will find out!
chat} 06:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Leibovitz article

Hi. I'm curious as to why you replaced the Leibovitz photo, which was the subject of the litigation, with the Vanity Fair cover? You noted the popularization of the photo, but that really doesn't seem relevant to me. Let's discuss on the Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp. page, please. --Lquilter (talk) 05:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How dare you say my reasons are "irrelevant"!

How dare you say that my rationale is "irrelevant" for an image. The image of the living person shows them at a completely different age to when they were well-known as Prime Minister. Your very action has caused the article to be distorted and that is not good enough. I'm fed up with idiotic deletionists distorting Wikipedia's accuracy and moderators who don't think about issues of accuracy supporting them. JRG (talk) 01:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You also ignore that there was an exception outlined on this very issue on the NFCC page when I wrote the exception. Why don't we stop making subjective judgments on pictures? I'm really getting tired of spurious deletions which take the policies and deletion rationales far too seriously and ignore common sense. Damiens.rf is making deletion nominations of Australian images all over the place in violation of WP:POINT and you are encouraging him. I'm sick of it - it is distorting Wikipedia articles at the expense of ludicrous applications of policy, and I will leave Wikipedia and stop editing if it continues. Please reply here. JRG (talk) 02:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The exception is clear about when it's applicable; it's only made for non-free images where the appearance of the depicted person is notable.
chat} 03:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
No it doesn't make sense. There's nothing that says that accuracy must come after free use. That's ridiculous and would defeat the whole purpose of Wikipedia - it is an encyclopedia after all. That requires accuracy, not some overemphasis on free images - because for a lot of stuff, particularly in non-US countries where there is Crown copyright, it's incredibly hard to get free use images, and even harder for those who are dead - but that doesn't seem to bother Damiens.rf - he thinks anything non-free is fair game for him to delete. He is introducing a blanket non-free ban via the back door and it must stop, he needs to recognise good faith and allow editors to improve articles, not just delete willy-nilly - and you need to stop being a sheep and supporting him in that, but contacting the editors who put up the photos and ask about the photos, understand Australia and its history and copyright status. As far as I'm concerned, and I'm sorry if this offends you, but your implicit support to his nominations is making you aid bullies like Damiens.rf who are attacking Australian editors with spurious nominations, even of people who are dead. Why can't you help editors who are trying to improve articles with images of people at an historic time when they held a particular office and are non-replaceable, instead of introducing subjective judgments about photos you don't understand? I'm just about ready to pack up and leave here - I'm tired of fighting morons like Damiens.rf who destroy a lot of good work that I and others put into articles. JRG (talk) 05:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not just an encyclopedia, it's a free encyclopedia: both freedom of content and encyclopedicness are equally important, and both have been part of
chat} 07:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Barnstar

The Barnstar of Diligence
Thank you for your diligent and consistently superb work at Template:Picture of the day. DurovaCharge! 02:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've earned this many times over. :) DurovaCharge! 02:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS permissions

Thanks for completing the image pages I uploaded. However, although I have uploaded four images over the last months, supplying exactly the same proof of exactly the same form of permission each time, one of the four images has yet to get the OTRS badge:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:After_Dark_11th_June_1988.jpg

Can you help? Apologies if I have misunderstood something. AnOpenMedium (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the OTRS agent who handled the ticket simply forgot to add the approval badge, which I have now done.
chat} 17:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Many thanks AnOpenMedium (talk) 10:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler, should be the one - upfront row, right( with the dog). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.22.239.65 (talk) 23:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

I just discovered that an image I uploaded,

shal 15:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Commons transfer talk pages

How can I find the

WP:LOTM) 14:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Click the word "identified" in the FP box -- that leads to the FPC page.
chat} 16:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Image:MtCleveland ISS013-E-24184.jpg, an image you uploaded...

has been nominated for featured picture status by me. Please drop by

shal 15:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Thanks for that. I don't know why you didn't nom it, it is a fantastic image. lol. Cheers, --
shal42? 23:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Differences between book and film versions of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Hi. I see you userfied this article around the time of its AfD. The article has since been moved back into mainspace and is still in the poor state that led to the AfD delete conclusion. I'm not sure this state of affairs is desirable. Can I suggest you speedy it and drop the user a line, explaining what's happened? --Dweller (talk) 12:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I didn't even remember this article, but it must have been a request at DRV or something. Anyway, it's speedied under G4.
chat} 15:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]


Dude!

Do not ever call me a Dude, and do not ever make major changes to articles without consultation on a talk page first!

talk) 21:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Enforcing image policy does not require consultation on a talk page, and "Dude" is standard California-speak.
chat} 21:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Not all of us are unfortunate enough to live in California! You are enforcing nothing that cnnot be discussed! please remember that.
talk) 21:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Early_audio_files_on_main_page.3F

Per our brief discussion a while ago. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 04:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

copyrights...

Sorry about the delayed reply, but I followed up & checked on this per your suggestion and found that mostly the responses matched your explanation. If I get myself any headshots, I'll definitely address this with the photographer in advance and in writing (since of course, there will be a great demand for copies of my headshots!)

The initial question on the noticeboard, about copyrights of medical imaging, is interesting; since the photos are taken as part of medical procedures rather than by photographers, and are taken persuant to medical orders. I wonder it there are additional considerations. I haven't checked that out, but it does seem like something that would be interesting to explore. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 05:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My gut feeling is that they should be public domain because they involve no human creativity (such as security camera footage), but I have yet to confirm this with an intellectual property attorney.
chat} 15:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Wellsboro and Corning Railroad image

Image:Wellsboro and Corning Railroad.jpg works for me now in IE7 - thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Works in Firefox too - Nice job ! Plvekamp (talk) 02:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dryadula butterfly photo

As much as I can be with a photo, yes. Compare with other images in google and you'll see for yourself. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 02:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guzan

I was referring to the deal in January that was, obviously, not approved, resulting in his return to Chivas USA for the first half of this season before he moved on again. I'm well aware that his deal was done this time, but the frenzy over transfers into British clubs that are pending work permits is astonishing, considering many of them don't get approved, or the player is loaned out to another league (usually the Eredivisie) while the player gets more national team caps. I just really don't see the rush to ram through on WP transfers that often take weeks to approve in real life. -- Grant.Alpaugh 17:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RARs

7zip will open rars (and pretty much anything else). Raul654 (talk) 23:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS - I took care of the ticket you asked about - Prapawadee Jaroenrattanatarakoon. Raul654 (talk) 01:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Just hadn't gotten to it yet.
chat} 02:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

IRC ping

What's up? GlassCobra 00:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got the photo for
chat} 02:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Image licensing request

Can you check the licensing and appropriateness of this image here [2] that I have uploaded. This image is taken from the website of Jaina.org. According to it, these images are used in their publications and are copyright free as per their statement [3]. If you find that this image and licensing is OK, I would like to upload other images from Jaina.org.--

talk) 06:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

The tag you chose is not really correct; that applies only to images that Jaina owns itself. For other things PD-old or PD-art should be applicable. The problem with Jaina's statement is that it boils down to, "We found these images from a number of sources and we believe them to be in the public domain, but we might be mistaken." This unfortunately is not good enough for our purposes; these need to be guaranteed to be good.
chat} 15:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Thanks for the note Howchweng. The Jaina's statement - The majority of the material of this CD has been collected from various Jain pathshala teachers and scholars of North America, from the past publications of similar CDs by the JAINA education committee under the leadership of Dr. Gada, from internet and e-mails of public domain, and my past 15 years collection at the Jain Study Center of North Carolina. The material compiled in this CD is not a copyrighted material. However by mistake on our part, if we have incorporated any copy righted material, please send us an e-mail indicating that you are the original and true owner of the certain material and have objection to distribute the material by the JAINA Education committee on a cost basis. We will remove it from the circulation. ...gives an impresion that most of this material is from its own publications. They have undertaken to remove any material that may have been copyrighted (obviously other than their own material). This may be some material that they may have taken from internet. So what more to we need to ensurer that Jaina's material is acceptable to wikipedia. I am asking you as I dont have much knowledge on this subject. My last FAC was a bit stressful on account of image problems. So I want to be sure this time. Unfortunately, not many images on jainism are availabe freely.

By the way the Calender of Jaina is its own publication...so will the images here like this [4] be acceptable. --

talk) 19:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

I-405

No, actually I-405 is not the worst. What's the worst to my opinion is I-5 and US-101 through Los Angeles Downtown/Hollywood. Many people takes the I-405 instead of the I-5 to Santa Barbara, Ventura, Central Coast Cities. People who lives in Orange County Coast cities just takes the I-405 all the way. The article is wrong when it said i-405 is the worst. If I was going from South Orange County to North Hollywood I would consider taking the SR 134 instead of US 101. I think US 101 is thw worst, and I hate it, but this needs a source.--Freewayguy What's up? 03:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the 405 has gotten a lot better since the carpool lanes opened up. I don't even go out that way much anymore.
chat} 04:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
What about the 101. The 101 is stll the biggest mess of all, and I call the 101 the toilet of the nation. Huh? The 5 is still a pain in the neck.--Freewayguy What's up? 04:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Really? 101 through the Valley is worse than the 405 through the west side (esp. northbound where there's no carpool lane)? I would think the latter is worse (maybe I'm just used to the 101 though).
chat} 15:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

OTRS image tagging

Hello there. I was referred to you by Nishkid, an OTRS volunteer himself. I was hoping that you can help me out with Image:Rang_De_Basanti_Golden_Temple.jpg. It relates to Ticket 2008070510003273 and User:Riana (now retired) was assigned to this, as per Nishkid. This image has been waiting for permission to use on Wikipedia since 2 months now. I don't know if that is normal, but I thought I'll inquire from you. Would you be so kind enough to give me a heads up on this? Mspraveen (talk) 17:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you cleared the image for use. Thanks for that! Since this was my first image upload with OTRS permissions, I lack clarity in how these images should be uploaded. Would you mind providing me with information about how images (from Indiafm.com) can be uploaded/used? Mspraveen (talk) 04:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The license tag on the image page is pretty clear: "All photographs used by this site with the exception of screenshots, wallpapers or promotional posters are exclusively created by their own photographers" and are free for the taking.
chat} 15:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Hello Howcheng. In continuation with the above discussion, I further discussed this with User:BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ (who along with Riana) worked out the usage permissions with indiafm.com. You may please see the communique between him and me here and here. As per this, it seems that each individual image from indiafm.com (now known as bollywoodhungama.com) has to be checked and verified at OTRS and an OTRS tag needs to be added as an indication of OTRS verification. Would you mind sharing your thoughts here? Has Riana left any note on this at OTRS? Mspraveen (talk) 05:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Howcheng. I hope I'm not being a pain here. Please let me know if you don't have time for this; I'll try to contact another OTRS volunteer. My further concern regarding these images is that after you vetted this particular image, there is no OTRS tag just as it is for this one. Mspraveen (talk) 16:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with your image maintenance script

Hi Howard, I've just been informed of a problem in your image maintenance script. The "orphaned fair use" button produces a message that refers users to template {{Not orphan}}, which is a template for free images, not non-free images. Could you change this? Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, {{
chat} 15:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Ah, I found it in {{
chat} 20:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Questions about image and
WP:NFCC

Hi. You seem to know a great deal about images and

WP:NFCC. There is a debate going on concerning a screenshot that may include copyright images within it at Wikipedia:Non-free content review#Image:JIDF FB Sample 2.jpg. I would appreciate it if you would take a look and add your thoughts on the matter. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 20:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Thank you

So help me, yes I did in fact read the entire long discussion which involved people making many of the same arguments repeatedly. User:Lid made the best analysis of what the issue is: "We have two individuals who have performed a notable act against a notable individual, their names can be sourced reliably and it is known information. That is all there is to it and that is all there is to see as to why the information should be included. –– Lid(Talk) 12:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)" Everything else that was discussed is simply noise that clouds the basic issue at hand. howcheng {chat} 02:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate that someone actually saw it, read it and acknowledged it. I got stuck having to play devil's advocate to Baseball Bugs' ridiculous moral justification that he saw as the only people opposing the names inclusion being left wing bleeding hearts which neglected to realise that even left wing bleeding hearts could also be for its inclusion, just on a different argument. –– Lid(Talk) 01:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know, his "their names should be in there as punishment" line was even less tenable than the "privacy is important" arguments -- at least those had a basis in policy!
chat} 02:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
It's an argument supported by pleas to emotion and demonises anyone who opposes it as being murderer lovers. Completely ridiculous, unsupportable and only makes the name inclusion support seem to be composed of raving "think of the children" idiots. –– Lid(Talk) 02:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A request for 9/11

Would it be possible to run a newly featured sound in conjunction with the featured picture? George W. Bush's 9/11 address from the Oval Office got promoted today. Image:GWBush Oval Office Address 20010911-1-.ogg I'm not sure where to raise this question, so if there's a different place that would be better to discuss it please let me know. DurovaCharge! 04:23, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured sounds on the main page

Think we can declare consensus for a one-day test of featured sounds per that last discussion? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 12:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging macros

Hey there...

I have been using your image tagging program -- it makes life so much easier! One of the images I tagged was

Template:pui because Imagevio is deprecated. I was therefore thinking your handy-dandy programing needs to be updated some how. I hope this is clear -- I am not fully sure I understand what I am saying -- but here is a link to the diff where I was notified about the change of template. thanks.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 13:24, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

DYK help

Hi there. I'm not sure if you are on wikipedia now or not but if you are the DYK mainpage needs to be updated. we are currently suffering from a major backlog so prompt turnovers are really needed right now. Thanks for any help you can give.

talk) 17:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Request for admin help (Images)

Could you take a look at the deleted local version of Image:TelegraphHillbyJohnCurley.jpg and give me the link for the Flickr image so I can record it on Commons. The link seems to have been lost when the image was moved to Commons.

Thanks in advance, Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 22:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no direct link to the image, but there's a link to the photostream in general at http://www.flickr.com/photos/jay_que/ -- note all of his images are CC-BY-NC-SA, however.
chat} 22:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Image:Tbpickens.jpg

Hi. It was noted at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions that Image:Tbpickens.jpg has an OTRS ticket (which you added) but doesn't have a licencse, or author. Could you check this please? --Rob (talk) 05:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have to contact the people who OK'ed the photo for more information.
chat} 16:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Re: User:Thabizness

The name was self-promotional (presumably for the group Tha Bizness). But if it's actually them and they want to provide a free photo, I wouldn't want to stop them. Spellcast (talk) 02:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Curiously, how did you respond to their OTRS query? Spellcast (talk) 22:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sent back the form letter telling them they hadn't declared the licensing terms, and they haven't replied yet.
chat} 22:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Advice...

Hey there,

You seem like an active and intellegent user on image discussions, I have recently become active here and nominated a large number of orphaned images -- I am sure you have seen. In response to one of my nominations, I got the following edit on my talk page. Any thoughts on how to approach this? The image has now been deleted so I can't see which one it is, and I can't specifically recall which image it was. Here is the nomination. I wonder how I could go about finding who the admin and buracrat I was reported to as his contributions do not indicate anywhere it was done. Thanks for any advice.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 22:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Empty threat, really -- doesn't look like he did anything. I would
chat} 23:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks for the advise and the action. In reviewing his contributions, it appears he has had a number of similar run-ins with people in the past.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 01:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seagull FP

This image: was just promoted to FP. Please _don't_ add it to the POTD queue pending its consideration for the April 1 main page. Spikebrennan (talk) 17:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but pooping animals are not going to make it to the Main Page whatever the day. That's just in poor taste all around.
chat} 17:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Featured pic from photo submission queue

See Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Josh Blue Raul654 (talk) 02:52, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS - this page needs MAOR KATZ. Raul654 (talk) 02:52, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, that's interesting. I'll be sure to email the originator if it passes.
chat} 03:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
PS:

HI (sorry 'bout the spammy note),

HI (sorry 'bout the spammy note), DYK updates have been a bit slow and there's a bit of a shortage of admins actively involved. We are asking folks who listed themselves on Wikipedia:Did you know/Admins to update details on this page - User:Olaf Davis/DYKadmins, so we can grade everyone's involvement (and who, knows, someone may want to get involved more :) ).Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Following up on the request

Hi, I don't see a reply to the 9/11 request and the date is getting pretty close. Any chance you could run that speech along with the photo? Much obliged if you can. As you may know, I nearly lost family in that disaster. Best regards, DurovaCharge! 22:50, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having a difficult time placing this in
chat} 23:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks, I'll ask for help. :) DurovaCharge! 00:28, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:POTD_protected/2008-09-11

Durova asked me to have a go at this, as I'm pretty experienced with templates. See what you think. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:The Yamamoto Experience

Yes, most of them have been uploaded. A few are still on my computer. If you need a list, I'll dig it up for you.Mitch32(UP) 20:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can go ahead and reference ticket #2008090810000883 or https://secure.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketID=1908330. Thanks.
chat} 20:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

References added to Janyse Jaud's page

Hi Howcheng,

I just added references to the Janyse page. If they satisfy the requirement, can the orange notice be taken down now? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janyse_Jaud

Thanks, Nickt83 (talk) 23:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loving and hating

Sorry to shoot down your featured image candidate. I vaguely recall seeing it at WP:BIRD but never got around to checking it was doing what it purported to (I try and do too much around here. It is still a good image of a fight. Once we get round to expanding

Rallidae it would be a fine addition to that article. Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

No worries; I'm only concerned about the quality of the encyclopedia. I'm gonna re-upload it under a correct name later.
chat} 06:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Murambi House Article Deletion

You deleted the Murambi House article in August 2008. Your reasoning was unclear. I believe a one-time user called Yuliyaa created a 'spoiler' page under my login name and wrote some rubbish. Can you tell me if this person wrote some other stuff on the article? In either case, please can I have the article back so that I can edit it. It seemed neutral enough and if you need me to add anything or change it, then please let me know. Thanks AngelinaA —Preceding unsigned comment added by AngelinaA (talk • contribs) 14:49, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the article because it's just some random retirement home.
chat} 15:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Image copyright problem with Image:HSUS new logo.gif

Thanks for uploading

Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation
linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 11:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miwok Airways

Updated DYK query On
17 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Miwok Airways, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page
.

--BorgQueen (talk) 09:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

T:DYK

Hi. You might want to Commons protect the image you added to

T:DYK. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

I protected it on Commons and cascade protection will take care this side. Thanks.
chat} 21:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Or more accurately, I thought I had, but I must have forgotten to change the protection level. Anyway, it's done now. Thanks for noticing.
chat} 21:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Image:Anschlusstears.jpg

I see you were the person who nominatd this image for Featured Status Image:Anschlusstears.jpg. I was hoping you could spare a moment to let me have your thoughts on its copyright status outside the US.

You posted on the copyright tag: "Because this was originally published by the Nazi regime, the public domain status of this work is only valid within the United States." I was wondering what the Nazi Regime have to do with it?

My understanding (in the UK at least) is that this is a work of unknown authorship first published in 1938. As a consequence, copyright expires at the end of this year in the UK! Are you aware of any reason, such as the author actually being known, that would lead to this chain of logic being incorrect? Thanks GDallimore (Talk) 14:36, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's a good question. I'm unsure as to the rules for works of unknown authorship in Germany. The point of my statement was to keep it from being moved to Commons, where it would probably be deleted, but assuming copyright rules are (reasonably) consistent across the EU, it could be public domain everywhere next year, if your analysis is correct.
chat} 15:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks. Glad it's not just me who's not sure about all this! GDallimore (Talk) 18:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NBII photos

I've checked the Ecuador photos from NBII, and here's a list of photos to be careful with (if not listed, they should be "ok"). I have not checked the photos from other countries, but a very fast overview suggested they were largely fine.

I have not yet had the time to check the photos by Christopher Canaday on the following pages: [23], [24] and [25], but a fast look reveal several mistakes, so I'd suggest you wait with them until I have had the time to review them. The "un-identified" bird on the last of the just mentioned pages is a

Willisornis poecilonotus etc, etc). Thanks. • Rabo³ • 20:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Learning POTD and need some help

Howdy... I'm working on figuring out how POTD works for the purposes of utilizing a similar feature on an internal wiki. I've hit a stumbling block.

By looking at the daily templates, it's quite obvious that some sort of automated process is utilized in their creation (otherwise some of the "if" code wouldn't be necessary since it would be hard-coded by hand). I'm trying to figure out where that automated code/script resides, if it's public domain, etc. There is mention of an automated script authored by Solitude but that was back in '04 and is apparently no longer available.

Would you be so kind as to point me in the right direction, offer some pointers, etc. in regards to creating the daily templates in an as automated fashion as possible?

Thanks in advance and have a great day! Overboard (talk) 21:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The templates get placed on the Main Page automatically because the Main Page uses "magic words" to dynamically set the date, and all the POTD templates have the date in the title. The relevant code is:
{{POTD protected/{{CURRENTYEAR}}-{{CURRENTMONTH}}-{{CURRENTDAY2}}}}
There is no automated process in their creation; I have to create the daily templates myself. The daily templates contain if statements so that the layout can change depending on some of the parameters. However, I can preload the template so that creation is easier. If you notice the URL for the "create" link for any of the unassigned days: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:POTD/2008-09-29&preload=Template:POTDstart&action=edit the 'preload' parameter contains the name of the page that should be put into the textarea by default (
chat} 23:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks for the info! Does this mean that the monthly pages, such as Wikipedia:Picture_of_the_day/September_2008 are no longer relevant (if there ever were in the past)? Overboard (talk) 17:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The monthly pages serve two purposes: (1) as convenient organizational pages, and (2) the templates there make it easy to create the daily regular and Main Page versions, so they're still useful.
chat} 19:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Archiving

I need some advice as to how best to archive my now unwieldy talk page, and how to link my talk page automatically to my signature. Peter Horn 01:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Information for automatic archiving of talk pages by bot can found at
chat} 02:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Non-copyrightable?

Hey there...

I am going through the GFDL-presumed category and have come across a question. I believe I have seen a licensing tag that basically states that the image is not copyrightable due to its simplistic design. I wonder if the following images, Image:Elec1984.PNG, Image:Elec1997.PNG, Image:Elec2000.PNG and Image:Elec2004.PNG wuld quality as such, in your opinion. Any thoughts? Also, is there a group or project that could re-create these graphics and license them cleanly? Thanks. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 17:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ellipsis one is definitely ineligible. The Canadian election ones, I don't know. If there is some specific creative reason why those boxes are arranged in that formation (in other words, if someone else were to re-create this image, would they use a different layout?), then yes copyright would apply, but if that's some sort of standard layout with regarsd to the Canadian Parliament, then they should be ineligible for copyright.
chat} 18:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks for the response. Do you happen to know the license template for ineligible? I could look it up, but thought you might know. Regarding the election ones, the layout mimics the seating arrangement for the floor of the house. The different colours represent the seating arrangement for each of the different parties. In the US there are two colours red and blue; Canada has dark blue, light blue, red, orange, green and gray. I could not really even conceptualize how somone would lay it out differently -- its basially a colour coded blue print. I wouldn't mind your further thoughts before changing the licensing on the election ones. Thanks.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 23:44, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
{{
chat} 23:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

I'm glad we worked that out

I see you just closed the deletion review after my comments, and I sincerely hope my comments didn't come across as brow-beating. I generally work in less controversial areas, such as style guidelines and article reviewing. My feeling is that there is still a lot of language left over from years gone by that reflects older attitudes, and when I hear the language, I say something about it; but of course, it's inevitable that I will come across as overly fussy and overly sensitive, and perhaps that's true. Still, my feeling is that more harm is done in general on Wikipedia by silence than by speaking up. - Dan

send/receive) 18:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

No worries, I've encountered far worse when working with NFCC. People get very upset when you tell them we can't use their non-free images.
chat} 18:14, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks kindly. - Dan
send/receive) 18:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Second opinion of Image license sought

Hey there, me again...

I just wanted to run this passed you as a second person for consideration. Image:Hhmra4146.jpg is currently tagged as GFDL-presumed and was uploaded after Jan 2006. The only thing is, it was the uploader who added that tag after getting the "no license" notification. If it is the uploader that added the presumtion, and in my opinion there is no question about him taking the image, is it reasonable to change the license to a GFDL tag? Thoughts? Thanks. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 21:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that would be reasonable to assume he meant {{
chat} 23:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

William Eric Alexander

hello. i'm not sure why you reverted the changes i made in an attempt to clean up the continued mal-edits in the William Eric Alexander article, but in future i would ask that you at least do me the courtesy of summary comment. cheers. --emerson7 03:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Koku Saitcho shounin.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Koku Saitcho shounin.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 10:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My resident image consultant....

Hey there...

I am looking for a second opinion on my approach to an issue I have stumbled upon. Have a look at this message I left on a users talk page. I think the images he has uploaded, at least the few I have looked at so far, are not free. He has not responed to me yet, but I have just this morning left the message on his talk page, so I want to give him a chance to review. but I wonder if my approach is even handed. The users uploads are great pics and as such they are well used in the encyclopedia, I am just not sure they are free and correctly licensed. I don't want to cause a problem where there isnt one, but...

Your thoughts? Thanks. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 17:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That works. The less personal way is to slap {{
chat} 20:29, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Erg (landform)

If you are still unhappy about my GA delisting of

talk) 18:43, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Re: Temperance Fountain

Unfortunately, I'm actually up in Baltimore, so while I am in the general area, I'm not really able to run by and take a look in person. I did fire up Google Earth, though, and poked around there. I'm not entirely certain that the given location is in fact correct; from what I can tell, there are a couple monuments there, and several pictures on

a/c) 23:42, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Bill Ayers Photo

Hi Howcheng, Could you please provide me with the required wording for the "explicit statement" required for the release to public domain of the Bill Ayers photos. How should the statement be worded to identify the two photos Mr. Ayers has already submitted? Thanks for your help, IP75 (talk) 00:25, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something like, "Yes, I agree to release these to the public domain." The problem with the existing statement is that it can be easily construed to mean a Wikipedia-only release, and we've had problems before when there was that sort of misunderstanding.
chat} 02:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Planetstoriesclichecover.jpg appears to be in public domain.

I've been checking copyright status on

Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_October_11#Image:Planetstoriesclichecover.jpg. Check the results over there, please. Thanks. --John Nagle (talk) 18:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Image:Douglas_Squirrel_Lake_Forest_CA.jpg

You added this image to the Tamiasciurus_douglasii gallerty. The location is listed as "Lake Forest, CA which is on Lake Tahoe".

Lake Forest is a city in Orange, County, CA which is several hundred miles from Lake Tahoe. There may be some area near Lake Tahoe that is known as Lake Forest. I wasn't able to find any reference to it with Google. Judging by the image I think the ID is right on the squirrel but I believe this species would be unknown in Orange County. The error is probably in the location attribution for the image. --Davefoc (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably right. I'll change the location to Lake Tahoe then.
chat} 22:03, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Found it: [26].
chat} 22:05, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

POTD Elizabeth I

FYI, I have started the long-planned article Portraiture of Elizabeth I, where the POTD is also included. - PKM (talk) 18:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Temperance Fountain

I was sending a message to User:Hersfold when I saw that you need help finding the Temperance Fountain. You can go to National Geographic's Map Machine. Click here to view the Washington, D.C. part of it. You can view any part of the world with this machine! It is like a free online GPS! If the information is unnecessary anymore, sorry I came too late. But now you know just to go to the Map Machine when you need to find a city or address. I hope I was of any help! Signed, BlueCaper (talk) 14:02, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For addresses, I usually use Google Maps (it's easy enough to get the coordinates from them), and I was using Google Earth to try and locate this monument, but the problem here was the satellite image was so blurry that I couldn't tell which corner of the intersection it was on.
chat} 16:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
The satellite images are fine-tuned on the Map Machine. They come straight from the head-honcho of computer technology--Microsoft. Also, there are road maps that would show the Temperance Fountain. I tried to look for you, but the D.C. area is too broad, and I was too busy. Maybe you will have some luck finding it. -BlueCaper (talk) 02:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PotD question

I was just wondering what happened regarding Image:Michele Merkin 1.jpg, it survived a delist nomination with relative ease and is currently the lead image in Glamour photography, was it ever featured on the main page? Guest9999 (talk) 15:25, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it hasn't appeared on the Main Page, and I decided not to put it up after discussion at
chat} 16:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
A bit disappointing in my view, seems like a bit of a slight to those users who work to create and improve articles around the subject area and those who strive to source or create high quality free media to complement those articles. Still your reasoning is sound and the discussion linked shows little resembling a
consensus. Thanks for your time. Guest9999 (talk) 16:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rammstein.svg)

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media
).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dunes.jpg

Hey there...

wonder if you can have a look at this image. There are two images which have been uploaded. The licensing on the image page seems to relate to the original sand dunes photo; the current photo does not have any licening info on the page, but the comments listed seem to indicate the postcard is public domain (which I question). Why doesn't the history show any info regarding the upload of the postcard image? The image is not linked to any pages, but if either or both of the images are free, they should be moved to commons. Thoughts? Thanks.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 22:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no source for either and it's orphaned and sand dune photos are easy to come by, so I'm going to just delete it.
chat} 23:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

MediaWiki:Gadget-popups.js

Needs same fix as User:Lupin/popups.js

Gonioul (talk) 22:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done
chat} 22:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Miwok Airways

the guidelines on spam
.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Miwok Airways and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. McA (talk) 05:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Todd

FYI, you may be interested to see that

Ashley Todd was speedily deleted using CSD:G10 as the justification: "exists primarily to disparage its subject." I happen to disagree with this decision as the article was neutral and nothing on the AfD page implied it as an "attack" page, and content that this is out of process. I encourage you to chime in if you have an opinion either way at User_talk:Orderinchaos#Out_of_order_deletion_of_Ashley_Todd. Thanks. -- Fuzheado | Talk 21:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Image discussion concerning NFCC 8

Would you be able to weigh in here please? The image in question is a rather unimaginative morph of Raj Thackeray and Hitler. It is being used in the article ostensibly because it aids readers' understanding of the situation. I disagree and I cited NFCC 8 when I tagged it. I now note that there is a simmering dispute about NFCC 8 itself though the main import of both wordings remains the same. I noticed you in the recent edit history of NFCC and thought that you would like to weigh in here. Thanks. Sarvagnya 21:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page redesign

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, PretzelsTalk! 08:56, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wahid Labidi

Thank you for the cool new picture! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 12:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't take credit; he sent the photo in to us.
chat} 16:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

DYK for Yellow-bellied slider

Updated DYK query On
29 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Yellow-bellied slider, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page
.

BorgQueen (talk) 15:42, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biblioburro

Wow! The newspaper articles I read had great pictures of the Biblioburro and I was filled with disappointment that the article would surely never have a picture. Thank you for your efforts to prove me wrong. It really adds to the article. Alansohn (talk) 16:13, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't take credit; the Biblioburro folks sent it in to us. I'm trying to figure out how to convert a YouTube video of theirs as well...
chat} 16:35, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Once the connection was made, you got it uploaded and onto the article, and that's much appreciated. I didn't know the Biblioburro had Internet access. It's a great story and I'm glad that the Biblioburro's supporters know that Wikipedia deems them notable enough for an article. Alansohn (talk) 16:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, since it's your article, why don't you look at their Blogspot page and let me know if you want any other photos. They are willing to release all of these, but I only took that one.
chat} 16:55, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

AfD nomination of Miwok Airways

An article that you have been involved in editing, Miwok Airways, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miwok Airways. Thank you. Eastmain (talk) 22:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will All Those Cleared Pix Be Deleted Now Because They are Duplicates?==

I don't get it. Please see my note on talk at User:Infrogmation thanx! EmilEikS (talk) 02:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Holly_Cheng/Archive13&oldid=1181163350"