User talk:Holly Cheng/Archive14

I guess I really should have done it myself by then, heh. Nothing personal I guess, somehow I knew that picture was a goner when I really couldn't think of anything to justify its presence.

By the way, I put an entry in the Barack Obama talk page FAQ (Q18) about the picture. There were some folks who were looking for it in the discussion and are quite eager to bring it back, hopefully this might raise their understanding on why it cannot be used in the Wikipedia.

Cheers.

--Aeon17x (talk) 00:53, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ernest Peixotto, 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 .

Cirt (talk) 22:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I had to wait until after the election, for one thing, since we didn't have a comparable McCain photo. Inauguration day would work. There's only one problem, which is that the photo sits in

chat} 18:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Is there a rule that the photo has to be included in the article to be a POTD. Can we use the Barack Obama FP and discuss the main article even if the photo is only in an offshoot article.--

WP:LOTM) 20:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Yes, see

chat} 20:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Can we sort of mention his political positions and then discuss him?--

WP:LOTM) 20:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I have moved your superb Proposal discussion from the AfD page to the "talk page for that AfD. No slight is intended... only a wish to keep the issues seperated. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've got the images for this article sitting in OTRS. Did you want to upload them or shall I? If you'd rather do it, the OTRS ticket is 2008111710014605. Thanks.

Please, if you'd like to help with another problem, see my recent note in Discussion on the Mae West page re references. An editor named Wildhartlivie watches this article along with some friends like User:Pinkadelica. They insist on having the unsightly reference template at the top of the article no matter how many references that are put in. It seems to me that there is some sort of personal policing of this article going on and that certain editors are hell-bent on controlling the content 100%. Reading correspondence between Wildhartlivie and Pinkadelica on their talk pages supports that suspicion (not very nice reading either, by the way). Is this allowed? I thought I made a reasonable point in Discussion there today, but it only took 4 minutes for Wilhardlivie to intercede again. We need another objective administrator's help here. Would you please help or forward this to someone who can?

I am now accused of "personal attacks" in my stating what anyone can safely surmise by reading the talk pages of these cooperating editors about Mae West (Pinkadelica's has just now been archived) which have been read by me and several of my office colleagues with amazement. How do you feel as one of Wikipedia's experienced administrators, about the current look of the Mae West article as adjusted since admin Kingturtle wrote on the Discussion page there? The editor Wilhardlivie has just added no less that 78 "citation needed" notes throughout the text, if my quick count is correct. What does this tell a newcomer about English Wikipedia (compare e. g. sv:Mae West) when looking for information about one of America's best known entertainers? When Wildhartlivie just now changed my "Through her world famous sense of humor, Mae West has become one of the most legendary of all American entertainment personalities" to remove the sense of humor, she removed the whole point of that author's book (the one the reference goes to). And why is "References" OK as a heading for every other article I've seen, but W won't have it here, insisting on "Notes" alone? If I am wrong about some negative personal editing and exaggerated policing of this article, I sincerely apologize. We cannot help continung to react naturally to what the evidence strongly suggests. Don't 78 "citation needed" tags constitute some form of graffiti? I would certainly never dare do such a thing, even if I got such a wild idea. EmilEikS (talk) 05:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason, this continues to be made a personal issue, which all began over the last weekend because I removed a US flag icon from the West page. Please see

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (icons)#Do not use flags to indicate locations of birth and death???????????

. In trying in good faith to bring the article to a well referenced state and reduce POV, the opposition has been ferocious to even minimal issues. I object quite strenuously, once again, to the personal attacks by this editor. So I monitor my watchlist and address issues I see. I object to the statements above about "watching it like a hawk" and trying to control the content 100%. An article full of unsupported facts is going to get tagged, there is nothing personal involved. I was even attacked for bothering to be about the only WP editor who bothered to answer inquiries on the talk page. Enough personal attacks. That I work well and discuss articles and issues with a handful of other good editors who are also interested in this genre of biographies is the ideal, and it certainly doesn't indicate some sort of personal agenda.

As was requested, facts and quotes needing citations (including statements about box office failures/hits, references to convictions, pen names, claims about things done, felt or stated, blanket statements about controversy, etc. etc.) were added and some POV comments edited. It is unproductive to compare this article with one on another WP version. That copious references are needed is an issue with the article's sourcing. Finally, I've twice corrected the section title "References & Notes" as not in accordance with MOS. Working cooperatively with other editors to bring articles to a quality standard is the fundamental purpose of Wikipedia. It is not wrong, nor is it objectionable. Stop making it personal Emil. Removing templates and fact tags/citations need tags doesn't improve the quality and verifiability of the article. Adding adequate sourcing does. As it states below the edit window, "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly...do not submit it. I apologize that it has spilled over to your talk page, Howcheng. I simply don't care to let such allegations go unanswered. It is also unproductive to cross-post the same messages to various administrator pages. [2] [3] [4] Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is some confusion about who "submitted writing" to be "edited mercilessly" here. My contributions to this article have been miniscule and very recent. What I have reacted to is how much contentiousness and argument and radical revision there has been since it was first entered almost six years ago, and particularly several of my associates and I think it is sad that an article about one of America's most appreciated entertainment people still today is found in this embarrassing shape when looked up on English Wikipedia. I'm sure thousands, including potential donors, have been surprised and disappointed over the years by that fact. It is my experience that too much fighting over something keeps it from ever getting fixed. I won't be fighting anymore about this one, just hoping to see something finished and nice looking soon. EmilEikS (talk) 10:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of the things I do not do on Wikipedia is play referee. Emil, as you are a relatively new editor here, you should heed the words of more experienced users and assume that everyone is working in the best interest of the encyclopedia, not that anyone is out to "get you" or anything like that. If you have content disputes that cannot be resolved amicably, I suggest you head to

]

DYK for Knight Foundry

On 22 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Knight Foundry, 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) 18:50, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chester Beach, 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) 07:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Royal Cortissoz, 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) 19:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. The caption you have looks good to me. Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 20:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The permission for this is in OTRS with ticket #2008112410001785 and ready for your upload.

]

Thanks! The photo had in fact already been uploaded as Image:Oklahoma City temple by Aaron H. Larsen.jpeg and tagged with {{OTRS pending}}. If you want to keep posting the ticket numbers to my talk page that's fine, otherwise the photos should be fairly easy for you to find. Thanks again! —Remember the dot ^(talk) 00:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:EdwinCJohnson2.jpg

Thanks for uploading

this list, click on this link

, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Six-Day War

I've reverted your addition to that article, because I think it's given

undue weight. Don't you think would belong in David Rubinger? -- Nudve (talk) 17:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm writing the Rubinger article now and will have even more detail about the photo in there, but Six-Day War needs that passage in order to satisfy

chat} 18:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Howard, even with what you have added, the photo should be next to the section discussing it, not miles away in a display-style showcase. Jheald (talk) 19:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented about this at my talk page, in case you (Howcheng) missed it. Anyway, if it's that big a problem, perhaps this section can simply be places as the infobox's caption? -- Nudve (talk) 19:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably move this to

chat} 19:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

POTD

thank u for considering my nominations...Alokprasad84 (talk) 05:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Text permission

Hi. I'm wondering about your removal of the process for handling text clearance from "When permission is confirmed" at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Are you planning to create a separate section? With your changes, contributors no longer have instructions for where to mail the permission for text or directions for noting the permission at the article's talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:33, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duh, I work with almost exclusively with images all the time, so I forgot about the article stuff. Added now.

chat} 18:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks. :) I was about to do something stopgap until we discussed it, but your solution was far more eloquent than what I was coming up with! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for David Rubinger

On 6 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article David Rubinger, 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) 15:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Custom harvesting

On 6 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Custom harvesting, 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, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ursula Franklin image

I forwarded an email to permissions on December 8/08 from Dr. Franklin authorizing the use of the main image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ursula_Franklin_at_book_launch.jpg in the entry Ursula Franklin under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). I have not heard back yet and in the meantime, a bot deleted the image, well before the December 12/08 deadline. I undid the deletion, but wish to get this issue resolved as soon as possible. Bwark (talk) 20:08, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art

Fantastic! I forgot you were from around there :)--Pharos (talk) 23:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Henry Reuterdahl

On 11 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Henry Reuterdahl, 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 .

Backslash Forwardslash 23:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Template syntax

Hi Howcheng,

I recently revised the syntax of

User:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js

to at least work with the new syntax.

If all goes well we should be able to change the syntax of the

PUI templates too, so that they match the IFD templates for the benefit of scripts like yours. I'm sorry for the trouble... —Remember the dot ^(talk) 01:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

DYK for Frederick Gottwald

On 16 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frederick Gottwald, 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) 10:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Leon Dabo

On 16 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Leon Dabo, 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) 16:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minimal use

Regarding your comment here [5], the argument is that 'minimal use' refers to it being displayed only once per article, not how many times it is used in Wikipedia. I'm not commenting on the strength/weakness of that argument, just that is what I've read from the RfC page. maclean 23:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Falwellhustler.jpg

Please forgive the intrusion, but replacing the content of the ad itself in text form amounts to the same necessity for fair use claim. Except the presentation and value of the article is compromised. You've previously discussed the importance of limiting fair use claims to iconic images specifically discussed and referenced in multiple media. The concept here is that it is the ad itself and not the text that is the satirical work. If you separate the text from the mocking visual arrangement of the interview as a cheesy advertisement, then you are clearly ignoring the point of discussing such satire. (As an example I'd like to reference File:Study after Velazquez's Portrait of Pope Innocent X.jpg, or File:Campbells Soup Cans MOMA reduced 80%.jpg - while these are drastically different scenarios, they emphasize the importance of artistic mimicry as being essential to the art/commentary as a whole).

I think this image more than satisfies each and every criteria for fair use and I urge you to reconsider your closure.

Regards, ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 10:43, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to have to disagree. The so-called interview is what makes the ad effective. Without the text, it's just a photo of Falwell and the alcohol. Was the ad really central to the lawsuit, however? If we had an article about the case, I think the ad is justified there.

chat} 19:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Duh, I'm really dense. Let me mull on this a bit more.

chat} 21:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

The case did indeed make specific reference to Falwell's likeness being featured in the ad. In the majority decision the justices discussed the appearance of an ad being a parody of a series of similarly formatted ads run by Campari at the time. It was decidedly the wry style in which the libelous statements were presented that saved Hustler from liability.

Anyway, I hope you had a good holiday season and have had some time to mull over the decision. Regards, ˉˉanetode╦╩ 18:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your note

All the copyright info is clearly indicated on the image page. As stated, it came from here, and its copyright info is here (the Flickr page has a link that reads "some rights reserved). If you are still not satisfied, let me know. Cheers. – ClockworkSoul 19:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike (CC-BY-NC-SA) on the Flickr page. Unfortunately, we can't use noncommercial licensing here.

chat} 19:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

That makes sense. I was confused because the tag you used states that "the information on [the image's] source or copyright status is disputed", which isn't true because the copyright status itself is clearly and correctly stated, but its particular flavor of copyright is one that we no longer accept. – ClockworkSoul 03:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Great Wave off Kanagawa.jpg

Hi, dropping by to let you know I've nominated this image for delisting. Would love to get a replacement image with better technical specs suitable for delist/replace. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 20:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good news: have located a better copy. :) Uploading soon. Durova^Charge! 20:50, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help please!

Hi, I've been given your name as a contact to help with the following image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Goreneo.png . It's fairly essential to the article (it illustrates the design, style and colours of the toy line in question) but it has been attacked numerous times by someone called MBisanz who persistently tries to delete it on the grounds that the license is wrong (without saying what can be done to help). Would you kindly check over the image and let me know how I can fix it? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by I Am The Namer (talk • contribs) 19:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Under U.S. copyright law (as well as many other countries), toys are considered to be copyrighted items, so any photo of a toy, even if you take it yourself, is non-free by definition (see

chat} 19:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks man, hopefully I can fix it now! —Preceding unsigned comment added by I Am The Namer (talk • contribs) 12:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Qian Xuan - Early Autumn.jpg

Your talk) 11:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply ]

New straw poll

You are a user who responded to RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — ^talk 23:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

diner

why did you alter my addition the the american diner page ie the 50s american diner it is an important addition the page and should stand thankyou —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamericandiner (talk • contribs) 12:00, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want your content to be edited mercilessly, I suggest you don't add it. I have removed the link to your site, as we don't need to have the advertising in the article itself. As your business appears like it might be notable for being one of the original O'Mahony diners, you might consider creating an article for it (like

chat} 20:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

A contest you may be interested in

Hello, Howcheng. There is a new contest for U.S. and Canada roads that you may be interested in. To sign up or for more information, please visit User:Rschen7754/USRDCRWPCup. The contest begins Saturday at 00:00 UTC. Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 04:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POTD notification

Do you mean Template:POTD/2009-01-10? You posted me the link that is Template:POTD/2008-01-10 OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 12:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a heads-up, the file was vandalized by someone (from 2575 X 2575 pixels) and reverted to a lower resolution (1000 X 1000 pixels) about 2 months ago. I have undone the vandalism but not sure if something needs to be updated OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 12:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, 2009, duh. At least I made the template in the right location. :) As for the vandalism, nothing else needs to be done. Thanks.

chat} 20:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Heh, no worries, I am still having the habit to sign the dates with 2008. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 13:44, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like fun!

I really dig that museum, too. My wife and I were there for the King Tut exhibit. I'll try to attend; thanks for the invite! --

talk) 00:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I would be happy to come, but school will probably get in the way. I will try to make arrangements, but it is most likely that I will not be able to come. Thanks for the invitation, though! --

Sign) 06:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Great!

Well first of all I would like to say thanks for the invite I have never been to that museum! I will make every arrangement possible to attend Thanks again ! House1090 (talk) 02:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

spam

do not spam my userpage. you knew it was wrong when you did it: you said "first off, i apologize". the next step would have been to not send it, rather than to apologize. please, don't turn wikipedia into another spam source. Tb (talk) 06:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

do you have any response or assurance that you won't do the same thing again? Tb (talk) 22:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first of all, I was using the term "spam" tongue-in-cheek, as my message was far from commercial in nature. I am sorry that you were offended by the invitation to participate in a Wikipedia-sponsored event and I will likely not contact you again in the future.

chat} 03:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

What, then, were you apologizing for? My objection is not to my inclusion, but to the whole idea that adding messages to large numbers of user pages without invitation, to advertize an off-wiki event, is a good thing. I guess you think that, apology notwithstanding, your actions were appropriate. This is sad; I think they were not appropriate at all. Tb (talk) 18:25, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you're in the minority, then. You can see three positive responses directly above your section here and four more at

chat} 18:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't think ten is a reasonable sample. Most people simply delete spam without complaining about it. Clearly, however, you believe you have done nothing to apologize for; I'm disappointed. Btw, by "off-wiki" I mean off-wiki, which it is. I don't know what an "official Wikipedia event" is, nor am I clear about why that makes it ok. Tb (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we will simply have to agree to disagree then.

chat} 19:08, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

User talk:Howcheng#File:Falwellhustler.jpg

Could you please get back to me regarding

User talk:Howcheng#File:Falwellhustler.jpg when you get a chance. Thanks ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 20:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't know if you've just been too busy or if I somehow offended you, but c'mon, spare a word or two. If you'd rather wash your hands of dealing with this, simply suggest

WP:DELREV. Alternately, if you have no objections, I'd like to restore this image and rewrite the rationale to address the concern brought up at IfD. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 06:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I've re-added the scan to the article and appended the fair use rationale. Please feel free to revert if you do not agree with this usage and I will gladly elaborate on and discuss the reason for undeletion at

WP:DELREV. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 05:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

April Fools Dispatch

Howcheng, I understand you select the POTD.

Signpost at the end of January or beginning of February. I'm wondering if you want to add a sentence at the end on POTD (whether suggestions should be submitted to you, how one will be chosen, whether new candidates should be encouraged that might fit with an April Fools theme, etc.)? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

RE:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art

Thanks for the invitation! I don't know if I would be able to make it down there as I live 35 miles northwest of Los Angeles (Downtown)in Santa Clarita. Also I don't exactly know which building it would be in (I assume either LACMA or LACMA west?)anyways. But again thanks for the invitation! ^_^

P.S: Don't worry, your message wasn't spam. If it was I'd have removed it by now. :P

Regards, Missingno255 (talk) 22:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just put your name down. I'm thinking we can coordinate carpools as well. I'm in Ventura County myself.

chat} 19:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Image question

I peeked at the FPC archive for passed photos, and according to the archive File:Eichmann trial news story.ogg should have already been the POTD but has not. I wondered if there was a reason why this was so (I recall an earlier image of mine was passed over on account of graphic depictions of death, so I was wondering if a similar principle was applied here as well). TomStar81 (Talk) 04:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, this one was temporarily skipped because it was too close to the other video in sequence. I was just spacing them out a bit, that's all. It will probably be up in a week or so.

chat} 05:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for the answer :) TomStar81 (Talk) 00:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Hi, you mentioned that Obama's portrait would be featured picture on inauguration day. A few minutes ago a featured sound got promoted. Perhaps you'd consider running it in tandem? Lyndon Johnson's speech when he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. File:LBJ Civil Rights signing 1964 edited.ogg. Suggest a listen, if you haven't heard it yet. :) Durova^Charge! 00:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd actually prefer to save that for July 2, the actual date of the signing.

chat} 01:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Fair enough. Perhaps we have an FP to match? If not, ping me please. Durova^Charge! 20:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA

Hey thanks for the heads up on this. I will definitely be making every effort to get to this - as long as I don't get delayed back from Europe as I fly back to LA on 27th. Couple of questions that I can't see immediate answers to...

• What does the official day enable us to do - does it bypass the LACMAs normal photo policy, does it give us access with tripods etc., what restrictions have they set out if any?

• The official LACMA day is 28th Feb, yet the submissions have to be uploaded during Feb, that leaves us no time to PP the images and get them uploaded? Mfield (talk) 22:12, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Howcheng,

Thanks so much for your message. I have some questions for you, my institution may be interested to participate in this project. Could you tell me a little more about Wikipedia's intended goals? From the discussion page, it looks like 3D objects will be the focus. Is that the case? What types of subjects are needed? Anything in particular? Why is LACMA limiting their participation to one day? We don't allow tripods in the galleries, will this have a significant impact? I'm concerned that the quality of the photographs (no flash either) may not be very good.

talk) 07:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Wikipedia's goal in this event is to get quality photos of art in order to illustrate our articles on the artists or the pieces themselves. We're still working out the details, but yes, I anticipate a good portion of 3D objects on the scavenger hunt list. This is because copyright laws in the U.S. state that faithful reproductions of 2D works are not subject to a new copyright, but photos of 3D works are, so it's harder to find free photos of the latter. Tripods will not be allowed and I'm currently discovering if monopods will be permissible. Because it's a scavenger hunt format, we want everyone to be able to compete on the same footing, so each event at each of the participating museums is only one day. I hope that answers your questions. Please let me know if you need any further information.

chat} 16:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:CA Ground Squirrel on rock.jpg

An image created by you has been promoted to talk) 07:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply ]

Alviso Adobe Community Park

A photo would be an excellent idea! I have been meaning to visit ever since the restoration of the adobe was finished. Look for it in a bit, when the weather turns somewhat nicer (hopefully next week). Best regards, MCB (talk) 02:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{tall image}}

New and improved layout!

I present to you the brand new {{Tall image}}. {{Tall image}}: Now the main page formatting doesn't have to be broken.^(TM)

Hope you find it useful.

Incorrectly labeled image in Wikimedia commons "Seneca nation" category

Hello, Mr. Cheng:

Apologies for bothering you here with what I'm sure is a routine administrative matter, but I'm not a regular Wiki contributor and don't quite trust myself to follow the file deletion procedures properly. I'm writing to you about this image -- [6] -- which you uploaded in May of 2008, currently captioned with the description "English: Seneca Nation girl in traditional dress at the Pow Wau in Salamanca, New York." It's a lovely photograph and I do not doubt that it was taken at the Salamanca, NY pow-wow as described, but that is not in any way, shape or form traditional female Seneca regalia; I am enrolled Seneca myself, living off-reservation but with family in the Allegany/Salamanca area, so it's a pretty obvious error to me. Real Seneca ladies' regalia looks like this: [7] -- photos from a 2008 powwow, also in Salamanca, NY -- or these historical example from the mid-1800s: [8] and [9]; there is a long cloth tunic/overdress, often with a decorative beaded collar and cuffs, worn over a cloth skirt and leggings. Older-style tunics/overdresses like the ones shown in those first two links tend to be very loose, but nowadays some younger women in particular favor more fitted styles, like this: [10].

The regalia shown on the child in the photograph in question is not traditionally Seneca, or even Iroquois at all (and for that matter, not even female clothing): the roach headdress, small feather bustle, and small shield worn on the arm all speak to it being one of the less obviously tribal-specific men's pow-wow styles, probably Men's Northern Traditional: [11]. Pow-wows are typically social, intertribal events (and many larger ones feature competitive dances with valuable prizes), so it is not at all surprising for a pow-wow held on Seneca land in New York state to feature dancers who have come from other tribes, as seems to be the case with the child in this photograph. Again it's a lovely photograph and certainly quite deserving to be featured in a more appropriate category, perhaps just a general one for pow-wow images, but it does not show Seneca regalia and should not be presented as such.

If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me via email (smillaraaq at gmail) or IM (smillaaraq on AIM).

Nya:weh,

Ava C. --98.169.225.180 (talk) 02:53, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have removed it from the

chat} 03:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

POTD

Hey Howcheng, I was wondering if you could schedule 2 of my FPs on the following days for POTD. File:Mikumi panorama.jpg for 5th March and File:Dar es Salaam Panorama edit2.jpg for 26th April which is the Tanzanian Union day, a public holiday celebrating the merging of Tanganyika and Zanzibar. Thanks, --Muhammad(talk) 13:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fulfilling my request :) --Muhammad(talk) 05:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The art gather thing

Thanks for the invite. Unfortunately, I'm significantly north of LA inthe Seattle area, and don't tend to get down there much anymore. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pic of the day Link error

The pic of the day File:Dogcart3.jpg very interesting pic and it caught my attention. With the intention of learning more about dogcarts, I clicked on the link provided on the mainpage.

talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Grr, that article was at

chat} 03:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Final version

As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hello Howcheng, It is not Indonesian. Have you searched that on the online dictionary? I try google language tool and it shows the language is Maltanese. I jsut founbd this Narmada Bachao Andolan (Movement to save the Narmada). Sorry, i can't help much! C H J L ^Discuss 07:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone tried a different online translator, which said Indonesian, but thanks for looking.

chat} 16:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

A request for March 29

Hi, would you consider running this image on March 29? That would match the 50th anniversary of the release of Some Like It Hot, which was filmed at this location. The movie stars Marilyn Monroe and the American Film Institute rated it as the best American comedy of all time. Seems like an engaging matchup. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 05:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The connection is a little tenuous, but sure, why not.

chat} 17:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

LACMA

Hi, please let me know if anything like the scavenger hunt comes up again in the future in the Los Angeles area. Unfortunately I can't participate this time because my camera went kaput a couple of months ago and I haven't replaced it yet. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost

There is an error on the April Fools day story, an article is listed as being a 2008 entry when it will be a 2009 entry, see talk page for details. Mjroots (talk) 11:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Loves Art

i will try to make it sunday afternoon. But i dont know if i can make it though I live far from LA, it going to hard. House1090 (talk) 23:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FfD to delete Time cover image

Hi. As you were involved in some of the recent discussion and debate about the images in the article on Intelligent design, I thought you might like to know a separate proceeding was brought to remove the Time image by outright deletion from the wiki . It's at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_February_12#Time_evolution_wars.jpg . If you are at all interested in the issue, it would be reasonable to post a "keep" or a "delete" at that page. ... Kenosis (talk) 14:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS Question

Hi Howcheng, I have a question about OTRS Ticket#2009020810018251, which is the submission of four astronomy photos taken in Cherry Springs State Park by Kevin Wigell. We are in the process of improving the park article in hopes of taking it to FAC, and would like to use the photos in question in the article. I have tried searching for the photos on Commons using the file names provided and using Cherry Springs State Park, but cannot find them. Is there a problem with the submission? Thanks in advance for your help with my questions. This is the first time I have been involved with an OTRS photo submission, so I am a little unsure of the process / what to expect / how long things take. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. They are uploaded and can be found in

chat} 23:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks very much (and for the followup email too). I have another OTRS question for you if you have the time. There is a photo for the article Plunketts Creek Bridge No. 3 which is on Commons here. A permission email was sent late yesterday by Kara Russell of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation to [email protected] - her email address is her first initial and last name (no space), followed by the @ and state dot pa dot us . The article is waiting at FAC for the OTRS ticket permission to be entered (all supports, no opposes). I am not sure how long it takes for all of this - Raul654 tried to resolve this last week, but there was a typo in the email address we sent her and the email never got there. Now it has been sent again. If you can't do this for any reason, could you please point me to someone who can? I asked Cirt but have not had a response. Thanks in advance, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Cirt just took care of it. Actually, the email address is permissions-common, not photosubmission (for future reference). Photosubmission is for people who are sending in photos to be uploaded by us.

chat} 00:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks again - sorry for the duplicate request and thanks too for the correction on the address. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, shoot...

...I can't make the LACMA, at least not this time. Please, please let me know when the next one's going to be. Feel free to e-mail the photos!  :) --

talk) 23:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Same goes for me. A family thing came up this evening and I'll be out of town on Saturday. I'm looking forward to seeing the results of the day, though, and I'd be very interested in attending another meetup in the future. Good luck, and have fun! Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 08:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:DefecatingSeagull.jpg

Actually, come to think of it, this image serves better to illustrate cloaca than any other image we could show. I think we should mainpage it, and just talk about that. The waste being expelled both illustrates the nature of what a cloaca produces, and provides a better view of the cloaca than we would otherwise have. Note the positioning: the feet pulled up into the tail, the cloaca forming a raised ridge - this is all very encyclopedic. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 06:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POTD reserve

Can I reserve May 23 for File:MtCleveland ISS013-E-24184.jpg now, please? I know that POTD isn't necessarily based on coincidence, but it surely can't hurt. Ceranthor 21:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aoi Miyazaki - Junjo Kirari Pure Heart 2006.jpg

Hi, I don't know if you've had a chance to follow up on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2009 February 15#File:Aoi Miyazaki - Junjo Kirari Pure Heart 2006.jpg, but you replied to my PUI posting saying that the Flickr address was for a different picture. Turns out that the URL I entered was altered. I've re-posted the correct URL - please take another look if you haven't. Thanks. --Mosmof (talk) 02:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the follow-up. I actually did contact the uploader again to see if she is going to claim authorship of it.

chat} 04:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for everything

I know you have one already, but you clearly deserve another...

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		This Barnstar recongnizes Howcheng's tireless contributions, from Main Page management to prolific article writing to seeking out great images by others to original photography.ragesoss (talk) 03:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Imperato

Hi, you closed that afd as a delete, but the article's still there. I was wondering what happened. Spinach Monster (talk) 21:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just looks like it was re-created some time after deletion (11 months, to be exact). I suggest you just re-nom it using {{

chat} 21:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

DYK update

DYK is due for an update. Can you do it? Should be from

queue 2. I can give instructions if you need. Shubinator (talk) 00:46, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Sorry, I'm heading out in a few minutes. Don't have time to hit DYK. :(

chat} 00:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Ok, thanks anyways! Shubinator (talk) 00:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shroud of Turin

Hi, thanks for selecting the image. Unfortunately I can't say for sure if the image is a negative or not. That's only what the caption in the article said. Diego_pmc ^Talk 17:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I also think that day's more significant. Diego_pmc ^Talk 14:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saxbe image

If you look at the final FAC for this article, you will see that the image you just replaced was found to be improperly licensed. Can you check with the image expert at the FAC and see what is going on?--

WP:LOTM) 06:14, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Ah crap, it's a Bioguide photo. Well, this is an easy fix.

chat} 06:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Additionally, I have to say that Jappalang is NOT an image expert. The Grover Cleveland photo he wanted replaced is perfectly fine, for example.

chat} 06:26, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Jack Kemp

Do you know about finding a good main image for

WP:LOTM) 15:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

[12] has a few PD photos of him, nothing great, however. Doesn't seem to be very many of him on the web.

chat} 00:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Ashes To Ashes

Thanks for fixing the Link on the text I contributed to the Ashes To Ashes page. 66.142.22.233 (talk) 21:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PPR

Do you know if there are any limits at

WP:LOTM) 06:50, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

How is the fair use photo of Madoff I uploaded different from the ones at Dennis Rader?

How is the photo I uploaded different from the ones uploaded for the article on Dennis Rader (a.k.a. the BTK Strangler)? I hunted for a freely licensed one, and since the one on Flickr is definitely a screenshot of a TV program, I thought that there are no free photos of him. Since he is a prisoner, one is unlikely to be created unless the U.S. Department of Justice releases a mugshot. Therefore, I used the same justification for the photos on the article for Dennis Rader, whose mugshots are fair use. Jesse Viviano (talk) 14:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Madoff's photo comes from the NYT, a news agency that expects to make money from that photo's usage. We specifically prohibit news agency photos in

chat} 00:08, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

John Steinbeck image

Was kind of dark and grubby. I cleaned it up and switched it. Mfield (talk) 02:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For that I would have just uploaded on top of the other one... but you're probably not a Commons admin, huh. OK, well we can do that tomorrow then after it goes off the Main Page.

chat} 03:50, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I know, I should probably do an RfA over there if I am going to continue cleaning up front page images, it would save the creating another version and the crossloading. Mfield (talk) 03:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

invitation

You're invited to sign up as a founding member, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#WikiProject Historic Sites ! :) doncram (talk) 05:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS advice needed to some user

Hello, Howcheng, I need your help regarding Wiki OTRS system and image permission because user Badagnani (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) assumes bad faith on my advice on edit summary to his uploaded image[13][14]. He not only removed the tag but also unreasonably attacked me of staling him. A funny thing is that he followed me first to my newly created article[15] (then his is the stalker in his logic), so I noticed his edit to the article as well as his image with improper copyright tag. I put {{wrong-license}} because the image and his confirmation email from the coyright holder should be forwarded and confirmed by the OTRS team according to our policy. Since you're admin both on English Wiki and Commons and have met him before, would you enlighten him about the system, and admonish his bad faith and behaviors? Thanks.--Caspian blue 04:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged with {{

chat} 05:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

He reverted your edit (he is one step ahead 3RR violation and his edit warred too much today).--Caspian blue 06:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help. I hope he now get the policy without further fuss.--Caspian blue 06:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TFP suggestions?

You seem somewhat knowledgeable about the TFP process - hopefully you might be the right person to ask about this. I've recently suggested that the Cobbe portrait (recently promoted to FP status) be the TFP for April 23, 2009, the day when the portrait will be open to the public for the first time (4/23 is closely associated with Shakespeare). Is there a process for "jumping the queue" in situations like this? Thanks for your input. Ronnotel (talk) 15:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, we can put that up for 4/23. You may have to remind me again closer to the date.

chat} 06:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks, will do. Ronnotel (talk) 11:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HMSPinafore2

Looks good, though I threw up a quick decrease in saturation, as I hadn't learned some of the tricks I know now back then. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 03:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image permission

Thank you for your notice about File:Shayang outside.JPG. Actually, though, I sent an e-mail with permission to OTRS three months ago, on December 12 when I uploaded it, and apparently no one has bothered to check it because the {{OTRS pending}} tag has been sitting there ever since. I'm having the same problem with File:Shayang workers.JPG: sent e-mail to OTRS months ago, no one has bothered to do anything about it. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 13:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since I don't know your email address, it's a little difficult to search for this in the system. Right now the oldest open ticket dates to March 15. If you wouldn't mind sending it in again, that would be great: permissions-enwikimedia.org. Thanks.

chat} 16:45, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Ok, I've sent it again. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see what happened: the release is not for a valid license. I will have more details in my email reply to you.

chat} 21:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Oh look another one!

Image permission problem with Image:WAAF_Sqn_Officer.jpg

Contacted the company concerned and they gave there permission, hardly my fault if whoever received the authority to use or did they bother to check and didn't act on it?

Anyway not meaning to be funny but if you are in that section of Wiki volunteers that deals with "permissions" then go and look for it as it was given months ago.

Alternatively if you are looking for something to do (hint: don't make a habit of annoying contributors) go and have a go at the vandals and especially the muppet who keeps vandalisng my personnel page.

Thanks - not in anyway being nasty or having a go at you --Pandaplodder (talk) 14:26, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am an OTRS volunteer, one of the people handling permissions. Assuming you have sent this email in, nobody seems to have processed it. Sorry for the trouble, but please send it in again, address being permissions-enwikimedia.org. Thanks.

chat} 16:44, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

File:Gasshukoku suishi teitoku kōjōgaki (Oral statement by the American Navy admiral).png

I've prepared a new version. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 16:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Electrocatalyst.jpg

Re. Image:Electrocatalyst.jpg

I understand that the email was unclear, so I'm writing to the author again, requesting a clarification about the status.

I'm hoping the image can be retained for a few mroe days, while I await a response;

If it's positive, I will of course forward it to permissions. If not, I'll flag the image for deletion.

Thanks for your help, --  Chzz  ►  15:20, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I checked with the copyright holder, and they said, somewhat confusingly, "Although the photo is in public domain, we are unable to allow it to be used for any type of promotional purpose".

I've tagged it for speedy deletion.

Thanks for your help, --  Chzz  ►  16:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They must misunderstand what "public domain" means.

chat} 17:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I guess so. It's a pity, it was a nice pic, and added a lot to the article. I can't find another anywhere. Shame, but there you go. --  Chzz  ►  15:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April Fool's Day POTD

Has an image been selected? There's not much happening on the discussion page. If I were picking, I'd pick the image of the comedian Josh Blue. It's about a comedian and it's somewhat silly. Royalbroil 00:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded and referenced Blue's article so there's more content to use for April Fool's Day if something better doesn't come up at the last minute. Royalbroil 02:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was looking through the candidates and still haven't decided. I have to figure out how to best write a caption for it...

chat} 05:32, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

It seems someone has already selected and image. If that image is to be used, then I suggest modifying the caption. --Muhammad(talk) 04:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That image wasn't even up for discussion, so I deselected it.

chat} 05:22, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Your image script

Howdy. A suggestion for your

image script. PUI is now PUF for possibly unfree file. You may want to change that when you have a moment.--Rockfang (talk) 04:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

April Fool's Day

Would

this fit the bill? Durova^Charge! 19:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

photo copyright permission

Hi Howcheng, this is about the message you left on my page about the photo BulletProof Messenger Press Photo.JPG. I did send off the required emails to [email protected] getting the approvals and got an email back from Tyler Van Wormer. I've forwarded the email to [email protected] and cc'ed the copyright owner. I don't know why the image wasn't updated with the ORTS details when they sent back the email saying that he had confirmed the permission. The ticket number for the email was 2009011610010217. Burgundysizzle (talk)

I looked this up, and apparently Tyler uploaded the photo to Commons without deleting it from here (which he should have done). Then the photographer wrote us an email claiming that he did not actually transfer the copyright to BulletProof Messenger and it was deleted from Commons. So I'm afraid I'm going to have to delete this image as well. To summarize, you did nothing wrong here. It's too bad the band's management doesn't understand how copyrights work.

chat} 23:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for the explaination, I understand now. Burgundysizzle (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Howcheng on the 16th of April I sent a follow up email to permissions @ wikimedia.org with extra information including an email attached from the photographer who made the complaint saying that it should be ok for the photo to go back up with ticket number 2009011610010217 in the subject line. Would it be possible to get someone to review the email and let me know if it's ok for the photo to go back up under the terms given or not? Burgundysizzle (talk) 09:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PUI name change

Hi,

User:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js to not work correctly anymore. I probably could fix it myself, but I am not much of a coder and didn't want to risk breaking it. :) Garion96 (talk) 00:19, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Fair use images on Central African Republic

Please don't remove images which have valid fair use rationales for this article from this article. Thank you. T L Miles (talk) 03:36, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A fair use rationale does not mean that it's being used properly. These images fall short of

chat} 04:15, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

A "decorative function"? See, this is the function of discussing things on talk pages first and then not using acronyms when people contest your actions.

WP:NFCC

#3 reads:"a Minimal usage. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information. b Minimal extent of use. An entire work is not used if a portion will suffice. Low- rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used (especially where the original could be used for deliberate copyright infringement). This rule also applies to the copy in the File: namespace." That has nothing to do with this instance.

WP:NFCC #8 reads: "Significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." This is the image of the first president and founder of the nation, in a section which extensively discusses his work and fate. I come to a different conclusion than you. But it is a point of debate. Not an enforcement action where you get to show up and start deleting stuff based on your perceived personal authority. We work by consensus here. I will not replace these images and we can discuss this (at Talk:Central African Republic, or if you prefer, we can get a Wikipedia:Third opinion) preferably bringing in other disinterested parties until there is some agreement, which I'm sure we can reach, on this specific instance. Thank you T L Miles (talk) 16:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Dali Atomicus POTD

Looks great, thanks! Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 12 POTD

Hi, I wanted to make a suggestion about File:Shroudofturin rotated.jpg, which is supposed to appear as POTD on April 12. Problems like this where the actual FP is not suitable for the Main Page have previously been solved in the following way: when you click on the displayed image (here File:Shroudofturin rotated.jpg), instead of being directed to its own description page you will be directed to the page of the actual FP (i.e. File:Shroudofturin.jpg). Also in the lower right corner there is an exclamation mark inside a blue circle which, when clicked, will lead to the displayed image's description page. (See the signature on this page from Wikisource for an example: [16].)

I remember I've seen this done at least a couple of times. Once for an animation and another time for a very wide panorama which would have look just as a thin horizontal line. (Instead of the full image only a section of the panorama was displayed which, when clicked, it would lead to the full image.) Do you think you can do something like this with the shroud as well? Diego_pmc ^Talk 10:03, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done using the [[File:Example.png|link=Main Page]] syntax.

chat} 17:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Request to check in on Foie Gras page

Hello there. You were previously helpful on the

Foie Gras page. I was wondering if you could take a look at the discussion section regarding unsourced claims (the very bottom section). There are 2 claims which they are insisting to keep in the article, but neither of which is found in the articles they are using as sources, nor have I been able to find support for them anywhere in searches. Thank you very much! 68.13.134.213 (talk) 19:34, 6 April 2009 (UTC)68.13.134.213 (talk) 19:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi, it looks like this could be placed on the back burner for now, thanks. 68.13.134.213 (talk) 20:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:POTD/2009-04-10

Not your best, I'm afraid: I've edited it a bit, which I usually don't feel the need to do with your usually excellent work. =) See what you think. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image permission problem with Image:Andystrangeway.jpeg

I keep on being contacted by important-sounding people asking about this image and asking for confirmation that it is legitimate or they will delete it. I have provided the email to me by Andy granting permission to the email address given, more than once, and this is a just a bookcover, nothing special; but I cant be bothered to reply anymore. Some people create wikipedia, and others destroy it. Some of them are vandals, and some are bureaucrats.Right now I cant tell the difference. Excalibur (talk) 22:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that you have in fact sent the confirmation into OTRS, I was unable to find it. At the time of my tagging your image, the oldest open ticket in the system was dated March 15, two weeks after when you noted the permission was sent. It's up to you if you want to send it in again: permissions-enwikimedia.org.

chat} 23:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Sorry, that wasn't you that noted the permission was sent in; that was someone else. I'll see if I can follow up with them.

chat} 23:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm back from overseas and'll check my emails for the permission one - I remember that it was sent to OTRS but only assume that the permission was worded badly. - Peripitus (Talk) 03:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK update needed

DYK is due for an update again, from

queue 1. Could you do it? I can do credits and archiving. Shubinator (talk) 02:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Ack! Happen to be in the middle of bathing my kids right now. Sorry!

chat} 02:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Heh, ok. Thanks anyways, Shubinator (talk) 02:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If DYK can wait for about 20-25 minutes, I may be able to squeeze it in.

chat} 02:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Ok – we'll see if anyone else pops by. I think it's likely it'll sit for 25 minutes. Shubinator (talk) 02:30, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I moved things from Queue 1 to T:DYK and updated the timestamp. I haven't done an update since before the current system, so hopefully I've done this right.

chat} 02:55, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

The next queue count should be bumped to 2. And the picture needs to be protected. Easiest, since you're a Commons admin, is to go over there and protect it, and add a {{Enwiki main page}} tag. Shubinator (talk) 02:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you'd already protected the image; sorry. Royalbroil took care of the queue count. Thank you! (By the way, there are current instructions for updating DYK at the bottom of the queues) Shubinator (talk) 03:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

heart pic

fyi, I have replied. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Obama-Biden_Presidential_Inaugural_Committee_logo.png

Shouldn't

WP:LOTM) 23:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Perhaps the committee is a private organization?

chat} 23:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

It is a Congressional committee and all of their other work is PD. See invitations at

WP:LOTM) 23:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I think it is from

WP:LOTM) 23:54, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

WP:LOTM) 03:46, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Nice job

I'm sorry, I wasn't able to check the caption of the Josh Blue POTD, I read your message when it was already on the main page. You did a nice job summarizing Blue's page, keep up the good work.--Music26/11 15:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New image project

Hi. This little form letter is just a courtesy notice to let you know that a proposal to merge the projects

Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration into the newly formed Wikipedia:WikiProject Images and Media has met with general support at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Files

. Since you're on the rosters of membership in at least one of those projects, I thought you might be interested. Conversation about redirecting those projects is located here. Please participate in that discussion if you have any interest, and if you still have interest in achieving the goals of the original project, we'd love to have you join in. If you aren't interested in either the conversation or the project, please pardon the interruption. :) Thanks. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pets.com sockpuppet.jpg

Hi, I noticed you were the Flickr reviewer for this image. Are you sure it shouldn't be transwikied to en:wiki and given a fair use rationale? I think there are underlying rights for the puppet. Been working on improvements to the Pets.com article. Hamlet, Prince of Trollmark (talk) 20:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC) I am an alternate account of Durova; seems appropriate to work on a famous sock puppet this way... ;) OK, I haven't been ignoring you, I just keep forgetting about this. I suspect you may be right. Toys are usually considered 3D art, and I uploaded that one before I understood the nuance of that rule.

chat} 03:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

POTD

It looks decent. Nt sure about saying "untold number of years" just before giving an approximate date, though. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 08:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding

this

When using the above script and clicking on the "Non-free use disputed" the edit summary used is The usage of this non-free image is disputed. As shown here. You may want to change it to say The usage of this non-free file is disputed. instead. Just a suggestion.--Rockfang (talk) 22:52, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Forcipiger longirostris

On May 1, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Forcipiger longirostris, 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.

Royalbroil 00:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of James Ranald Martin

Great find of a pd photo! I tried a lot and couldnt find it at all! Cheers. prashanthns (talk) 01:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: POTD notification

The Crested Tern is performing a breeding

talk) 05:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

William Woodruff

Thanks for the ticket number. Do you know if the file has been uploaded yet and, if so, the file name? Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 17:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Valentine Baker (pilot)

On May 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Valentine Baker (pilot), 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.

Shubinator (talk) 19:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and followup question

Hi Howcheng, thanks for adding File:Cherry Springs telescopes.jpg to the Cherry Springs State Park article. I was wondering if that was the only photo submitted to OTRS for the article or if there was another photo submitted? I understood there might also be one of the domes submitted, to replace File:Cherry Springs State Park Astronomy Domes.jpg. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there was also

chat} 02:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks - at peer review there were complaints about my picture (the lighting is not great). The shed is shown in the panorama at the bottom of the article. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Loeb

I just wanted to personally thank you for your attention and administrative action to remedy the photograph issue. My regards. --Anaheim79 (talk) 00:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

An image created by you has been promoted to Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 06:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply ]

File:Jules Massenet - Le Cid 2e Acte, 3e Tableau - L'Illustration.jpg

Could you schedule this for November 30th? That's the date of the opera's première. There's another image of Le Cid, but unless you want to run that on November 30th next year, any day will do for it. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 14:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POTD May 13

Thanks for your note. The caption seems quite OK - but I added a link to the full size image. As you've noted, I haven't been voting on FPC for quite some time - I got fed up by all the petty quabbling, especially opposes focusing on minor technical faults in an image while totally disregarding its EV. (IMO, and as I've said many times, FPC should be about building a better encyclopedia, not a photo contest...) The few times I've lurked there since, the petty fighting still seems to go on, and nowadays the submissions appear to be mostly insects and restored images, anyway... ;-) Wishing you the very best, --Janke | Talk 07:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It almost seems

chat} 07:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Not really. I've had a few looks at it, but to me, VPC, just as FPC, appears to be more for "showing off", rather than something that improves the encyclopedia. My future contributions to Wikipedia will be in patrolling watchlist articles, and fixing errors I happen to come across when browsing. Greetings, --Janke | Talk 10:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WLA photos

We're still waiting for the museums to finish the big job of putting in all the institutional captions (they've made a lot of progress, but it's not done yet). The Brooklyn Museum should be able to give us the word when this is complete, at which time we can start working with commons:Template:WLA and the semi-automated uploading process that User:Kaldari has been working on. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 15:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

photosubmission queue.

Re [17]

When should tickets go to photosubmission? -- Jeandré, 2009-05-14t21:04z

When they have a photo attached to the email and they are asking us to put it into an article. Thanks.

chat} 21:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Articles for deletion nomination of Mordor (band)

BB 14:18, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Goats

Hey - re. revert; check the prev contrib; play fair :-)

here

 Chzz  ►  23:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the goat obsession?

chat} 23:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Lance Corporal William Windsor (retd)  Chzz  ►  23:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Despite your well-intentioned efforts in modifying policy, I'm afraid that

chat} 23:47, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

FPC discussion

This page has been started to review, discuss, and propose changes to the current closure process of Wikipedia Featured picture candidates. The need for this discussion has arisen following complaints and suggestions raised at the FPC talk page in May 2009. This time I believe we are getting somewhere and would appreciate your participation. Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:55, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fancy FOrtune Cookies article - references

References added, is the current amount sufficient? Kaschro (talk) 17:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[18]

Queenston, Ontario

by army surgeon Edward Walsh.

I'm boycotting FPC just now, but I'll restore this watercolour for you. Someone else will need to nominate it. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 07:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's done! But, as I said, not going to nominate it, as I'm boycotting FPC. Up to you what you do with it. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 11:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Formal Mediation for Sports Logos

As a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about images of performance or curtain calls

Hi, Howcheng, can I ask you about whether images taken during curtain calls are okay to upload to Commons or not. In my short knowledge, even if I get a photographer's permission on opera images taken during the performance, they are not allowed unless I get a permission from the opera house. However, if I just get images taken during the curtain calls, can I use them as PD such as these? Or if we already have a well-documented policy on this, could you direct me? Thanks.--Caspian blue 17:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(in the hope Howcheng doesn't mind a little side commentary) Two tiered answer here:

1. Commons doesn't object--in a general sense--to uploads that were taken in breach of contract obligations. Typically we get this with museums that try to restrict photography: the contract is between the museum and patron, so Commons is not at risk for rehosting the image if the patron decides to upload it. The patron could be at risk for breaking contract, so that's a risk for the patron to decide.
2. This isn't museum photography, though. It's photography of recognizable people. In this situation the indoor/outdoor distinction is relevant. If it's an outdoor ampitheater, no problem. If it's indoors then the individuals have personality rights and you would need their permission (probably via OTRS) to upload to Commons.

There's a tricky nut to crack; here's hoping the answer makes sense. Durova^Charge! 17:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks. Images that I try to get from Flickr are all taken indoors, so I think I have to jump over more huddle for this. --Caspian blue 17:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Durova's answer is slightly off. See

chat} 18:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Interesting interpretation; no objections here. Durova^Charge! 18:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You had permission to take photos. They can't very well expect privacy at a public performance where photos are allowed. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 19:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the input. One of my concerns is that since opera singers perform in a costume offered by opera houses, so those are kind of "art works" of designers employed by the opera companies. Not to mention, stage setting is a job of set designers hired by the companies. Imagine operas in an Arena or in BBCProms. Even if photos were taken outdoors, I'm not sure as to whether the issue is just limited to the publicity.--Caspian blue 01:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Message regarding your use of the No Multi License Template

In case you are not aware, the Wikimedia Foundation has proposed that the copyright licensing terms on the wikis operated by the WMF – including Wikipedia – be changed to include the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC-BY-SA) license in addition to the current GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) as allowed by version 1.3 of the GFDL. The community has approved this change with 75.8% in favor, and on June 15, 2009, the change will take effect.
You currently have {{NoMultiLicense}} on your user or user talk page, which states that your edits are licensed under the GFDL only. On or before June 15, this template will be changed to reflect Wikipedia's new licensing terms. If you accept the licensing change, you do not need to do anything (and feel free to remove this message); if you do not accept it, we regret that you will no longer be able to contribute to the encyclopedia. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#NoMultiLicense template if you have any comments.

Delivered by The Helpful Bot at 20:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC) for the Village pump. Report errors here. [reply]

Canada FP

I managed to find some. See:

Nominate! 20:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

NowCommons: File:EldoradoNatlForestMap.png

talk) 00:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Jeremy Stamper

That image resizing was my fault. The original version I edited had the syntax messed up and I didn't know there was a way to resize the image in the infobox. Sorry about that. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 18:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pic of the Day 6/10/2009

It's 2009, not 1963 --ICarly fan 0246 (talk) 02:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh, what?

chat} 03:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Umm, yes, it's 2009 not 1963. I'd fix it but it's blocked today from editing by ordinary users (like me) Rustyfence (talk) 04:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wallace_at_University_of_Alabama_edit2.jpg <-See link and history —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rustyfence (talk • contribs) 04:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK. Got it. Fixed. Thanks.

chat} 05:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Orphaned non-free media (File:2239.news lg conan logo revised.png)

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) 06:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:POTD/2009-06-14

thanks. Dlohcierekim 22:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POTD possibility

Not quite sure how you go about your process, but this just passed. It occurred on July 25, which seems to be empty. Not sure if this would be "butting" the line too far, but I noticed you use special images on certain days if the context is appropriate. Thanks much! wadester16 04:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ais523/topcontrib.js

I'm not sure what User:X! or you were trying to do to the topcontrib script,Hist but it messed something up. It's supposed to color edits on contribution pages blue if that's the most recent edit, green if there have been more by the same person, red if another has edited, and yellow the the same person and another have edited. However, now it is only red and yellow according to the person's own edits. I'm also not sure why edits to that page affected my .js, but it did after the edits were made and something's wrong. Please change it back to this edit, at least as a test. Thanks, Reywas92^Talk 02:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The HTML changed for the word "(top)" -- it went from <strong> to <span class="mw-uctop">. If you

chat} 02:37, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I tried that again, but all I got was red and yellow on the contribs page. Are you getting blue and green on yours? Could you please take a look at my .js? Thanks! Reywas92^Talk 03:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There you go. Ctrl-F5 and you should be back to normal.

chat} 03:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you very much! Though if my local copy stayed the same, shouldn't its effect have as well? Reywas92^Talk 15:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, because the HTML changed, so the code was referencing elements that were no longer there -- it became outdated. If you use the shared version, you won't get out of sync again.

chat} 16:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Your quick image delete script

I keep getting an error whenever I try to use it to mark a non free image as being orphaned:

Webpage error details

User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; GTB6; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; AskTB5.2) Timestamp: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:56:28 UTC


Message: 'nextSibling' is null or not an object Line: 80 Char: 5 Code: 0 URI: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s

Any ideas?--Rockfang (talk) 21:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the image you're trying to tag?

chat} 21:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

There were a few: File:(LLoyd Banks)Help.jpg, File:0 Story OST.jpg, and File:B0000TGA6O.01. SCLZZZZZZZ .jpg--Rockfang (talk) 21:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing it.--Rockfang (talk) 21:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now getting a similar error while trying to use the "non-free use disputed" function.--Rockfang (talk) 20:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. It is working fine now.--Rockfang (talk) 20:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

At Template:POTD/2009-06-25, the "see also" link at the bottom still links to June 5th, not June 25th. Not sure if this is a problem, but I thought I'd leave a message here just in case its something that needs fixed. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment of Ramona

I have conducted a reassessment of this article as part of the GA Sweeps process and have de-listed it as there are a number of issues which need attention. Details may be found at Talk:Ramona/GA1. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation not accepted

A not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos . For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 02:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Michael Jackson media coverage image

Hello there; I was pointed in your direction by somebody else.

I have created the following image: http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/6937/jackson2.png

Can this be included in the MJ article under the death section?

I believe it qualifies for WP:NFCC on policies 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8.. primarily as they are free-to-air broadcasts captured in Europe, the images aren't replaceable by anything else and it's a pretty major event. For these reasons I think it should be covered under fair use.

Please let me know what you think, Dvmedis (talk) 20:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's particularly necessary. There's no reason we need to see screenshots to understand that his death was reported worldwide.

chat} 23:00, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Constantinople map POTD

The caption is fine, just wanted to say thanks. :) Cheers, Constantine ✍ 23:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Wikipedia_talk:Picture_of_the_day#WP:Picture_of_the_day_For_March_4th_2010

Sir,

So you are telling that the image was still the "POTD for March 4th 2010", right? And shall I confirm that, that particular date was reserved for the image and anybody else creating a schedule in future will be aware of this one? - Vaikunda Raja (talk) 15:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's correct.

chat} 23:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

POTD 5 July

Hey, No big, 5th July is fine as well. One concern though. The dimensions of the image are such that IMO for an attractive display the {{wide image}} template would be better. As it is now, hardly anything can be seen without opening the image page. 4000px should be ok. Thanks --Muhammad(talk) 20:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the regular POTD template doesn't support the wide image template, so I can't really do much there, and I tried to use it on the Main Page version, but I can't get it to work correctly. People can still click through to the image page, though.

chat} 23:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I tried the wide image template, see

User:Muhammad Mahdi Karim/Sandbox and User:Muhammad Mahdi Karim/POTD. Looks much better to me. --Muhammad(talk) 07:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I created Wikipedia:Today's featured picture (enlarged)/July 5, 2009 – linking from the Main Page template in sort of the same way like the Wikipedia:Today's featured picture (animation) pages. Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible move of Nazi plunder

I have started a discussion on possibly moving Nazi plunder. As you are currently a reasonably active editor, as well as a past contributor to the article, I hope you can find some time to make comments at renaming Nazi plunder. Unschool 17:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no particular opinion on this. My only contribution to that article was to add an image.

chat} 18:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Calaveras Skull

Hi. I have a question about your source on the talk page of that article. Thanks, Auntie E (talk) 17:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re POTD notification

Hi. All looks great. Thanks —Jeremy (talk) 14:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: File:Eric wynalda.jpg

I no longer have the original email I received from Jack Huckell of the Soccer Hall of Fame, that was ages ago. I did paste the contents of the email onto the image page. I guess I can contact them again if that's what Wikipedia requires now, but I don't know if they'll reply within a week before the file is deleted. XXX antiuser 20:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your image script

For some reason, when image thumbnails were disabled, your script seemingly stopped working...

Could you possibly look into this ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed.

chat} 22:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Craigie/Koestler

Howchaeng, In 1st instances the reference given does not state to whom Craigie made this 'confession'. Cesarani is careful NOT to say that she made it to him. In 2nd instance, if you read Cesarani's book you will see (I am sure you will!) that it so blatantly unprofessional as to be almost unbelievable. How can any one make an allegation that so and so was a "serial rapist" without substantiating it? I could cite literally dozens, if not hundreds, of extraordinarily wild claims by Cesarani, which literally makes the reading of his book painful and distasteful. It really does! And now comes the rub - I actually don't like Koestler. He may have been a brilliant thinker but, I see him as a lousy, unprincipled, rather detestable human being. But that does not justify the sort of allegations and innuendos served up by Cesarani, nor its repetition on Wiki. And as for the BBC, you seem to hold it in much greater esteem than I do. 3ig-350125 (talk) 00:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to read

chat} 01:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Invitation to provide further input on desysop proposal

As someone who commented either for or against proposals here, I would like to invite you to comment further on the desysop process proposal and suggest amendments before I move the proposal into projectspace for wider scrutiny and a discussion on adoption. The other ideas proposed on the page were rejected, and if you are uninterested in commenting on the desysop proposal I understand of course. Thanks! → ROUX ₪ 04:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

California Palace of the Legion of Honor

Hello
You added a lead image to this page a while ago; there is a discussion on the lead image for this page

here. You might want to comment...Swanny18 (talk) 16:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Hiawatha statue Ironwood Michigan.jpg)

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 'file' 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 "File" 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) 06:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 10

Thank you very much for putting it in the queue. I still think it should run on April 1, though. :) Durova²⁹² 02:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POTD request

Hi - I see that the POTD queue is currently drawing from around November/December last year, and therefore my first and so far only FP,

t/c) 06:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Not a problem.

chat} 18:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

POTD 9/11

Would you have an issue if I used File:Sept 11 monument in NYC - August 2004.jpg for POTD 9/11/09? wadester16 16:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good plan.

chat} 18:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Victorian architecture

Hi Holly Cheng/Archive14! An article you have been concerned with has many issues and urgently needs improving. If you can help with these issues please see Talk:Victorian architecture, address the different points if you can, and leave any comments there.--Kudpung (talk) 01:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this is the only edit I've made, which is hardly what I'd call being "concerned" with, but thank you for the notification.

chat} 03:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

User:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js

amd "no source" link in toolbox

Nothing appears to happen when I click on the "No source" link. Any suggestions?--Rockfang (talk) 06:51, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas what it might be?--Rockfang (talk) 04:10, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still not working. feydey (talk) 14:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, the "Mark as Commons duplicate" link still works.--Rockfang (talk) 04:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. Those thumbnail images keep being added and removed, and that keeps messing up my script. This is now fixed.

chat} 18:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

No worries on the delay. Thank you for fixing it. In my opinion, it is a VERY useful script. Thank you for writing it. :) Rockfang (talk) 18:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OS

Well done YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Emilio Delgado

Hi, check out User_talk:Savoirflare and here. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:06, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but still, "vandalism" is a loaded term to be using in your edit summary. I've had OTRS contact with this user, who happens to be married to Mr Delgado, so we should endeavour to be nice. Thanks.

chat} 03:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

OTRS verification

Hi Howcheng, could I get you to verify a claim of OTRS permission for me? File:Daniella Alonso.jpg, which is on Commons, is obviously a press photo. It was copied to Commons from en and you can see the original at Special:Undelete/File:DaniellaAlonsoHillsPremiere.jpg. The uploader uploaded it with the OTRS tag in place, which is rather unusual. He gave source information as viewimages.com and hotflick.net. I've got to think that there's about zero chance this permission is legitimate and that really it's just copied from another file. Could you check for me? Thanks. --B (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that ticket is for

chat} 16:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Gaza

Writing about Israel's invasion of Gaza without mentioning that the Israelis were responding to rocket attacks on their cities is hardly neutral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.114.61.240 (talk) 04:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, you're engaging in a moot exercise, since that photo was Picture of the Day on August 22. Secondly, the POTD blurb only serves as a lead-in to the main article itself, and therefore not every facet can be included (for space reasons). Lastly, the blurb is only discussing international reaction to the Gaza War; the reasoning behind Israel's attacks are out of scope. One additional thing: The photographer wanted that photo to run on the

chat} 05:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Picture of the day 29th August (Gazania rigens)

Hi Howcheng. Just wanted to say I'm so glad to see something from Africa as the picture of the day. Last time I complained at the amount of stuff from Australia I was told that Wikipedia has a systemic bias. In fact looking over the latest POTD's I see 2 Australian birds and 1 Australian bug. Again, presumably systemic bias. So again, so pleased to see something from Africa, and please, no more Australian birds! :) Cheers Rfwoolf (talk) 17:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is that we have four very talented photographers from Australia and many of their photos become FPs. In fact, I've been consciously skipping a whole series of Tasmania FPs so that we don't have a huge run of them. And sorry to burst your bubble slightly, but today's African flower picture was actually taken in Australia by one the aforementioned photographers (as was the recent Colorado Spruce photo). :)

chat} 18:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for the response and for acknowledging my message :) Rfwoolf (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pyle pirate relaxing b.png

This one doesn't thumbnail very well - would it help if I provided, for the mainpage itself, a version optimised for thumbnailing? We could use a simple image map to link tot he main image. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 201 FCs served} 20:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I should really try and see if I can't get a better version of that image before then. I'll upload over if that proves feasible) Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 201 FCs served} 20:24, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that would be fine. Let me know when it's ready.

chat} 20:38, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Spanky

Hi Howcheng, just wanted to swing by and say that I thought your picture of Spanky was more noteworthy than it got credit for when you nominated it. So sorry to find out the poor little guy isn't around anymore. I've got a soft spot for cats. 04redsox07 (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your assistance please...

The record shows you deleted File:Iceberg nasa.jpg.

You said it had been listed at the copyright problems forum for over a week. I am reviewing all the images I uploaded when I don't remember a discussion over its deletion. I checked my talk page, which shows that the guy who nominated the image left me a note saying he had replied on Image talk:Iceberg nasa.jpg.

That has also been deleted. NASA images are almost alwasy PD. I'd like to review that discussion. Could you provide me with a copy of text information I offered in the original image file, and that talk page discussion.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 22:41, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, according to

chat} 01:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Note

Thank you for caring re: my loss. DS (talk) 13:39, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Holly_Cheng/Archive14&oldid=1181163352"