User talk:Megapixie/2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Archives
1. 29 June 2005 to 6 December 2006

Archive 2 (6 December 2006 to 20 Octover 2007)

Please note this page is archived. I may not see your additions to this page - please talk to me via my main talk page at User talk:Megapixie. Megapixie 08:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


Thank you!

Thanks very much for answering my copyright question! Squeezeweasel 12:15, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help with the images. When I uploaded them, I followed what had been done for the photo of Paddy Torsney, but I also noticed that the warning on Mike Wallace's photo mentioned a date of May 4, 2006. Did the rules change on that date? Because Paddy's photo seems to be ok without the fair use rationale. --James Duggan 07:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Stanthonyrecession.jpg

I hope you don't mind - but I just photoshopped your photograph of the image to make it more diagram like. I hope you don't mind. Regards, Megapixie 12:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Your photoshopping looks great. In retrospect I should have done that myself. I'm just curious about the claim that it was the product of the Corp. of Engineers. It may be, but I haven't any proof of that. Do you?

I'm also curious, in the general case, when is it acceptable to photograph and post a copyrighted image? I posed the question on Wikipedia talk:Image use policy, and no one has answered. Do you have an opinion about that? Appraiser 18:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
The one that bothers me most is the main picture in Campbell's Soup Cans. The photographer claims that it is his own work, but it is a reproduction of a piece of art in a gallery. Surely that photograph shouldn't be Public Domain. Do you think? Appraiser 23:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Your diagrams

Hi. Do you have the original files for the

Indolences
02:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Upload them here and send me the links and I'll see what I can do. --

Indolences
09:32, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Bus_crash_pic-1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading

our fair use policy
).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MECU≈talk 01:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope, didn't plagiarize

For those two articles, I changed the wording of the sentences, thus not plagiarizing EB 2005. They may be well written, but they lack the obvious grammar of an EB article.Andrewdt85 10:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Spam

Thanks for reverting all that spam from 66.9.94.34. I caught a few later ones as well. Raymond Arritt 02:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Men in Black (disambiguation)

I do not have a strong opinion one way or the other. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 08:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

OK cool. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 08:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Image

Megapixie, I left some more q. there pls ansrwer them. You've answered about Logo with rational But No SOURCE. But I mentioned there term Theft. Please clarify that one too.Thanks--NAHID 12:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I left message :)--NAHID 13:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Megapixie/CopyrightFlowChart/ImageAnyLicense

Here you put explanation of GFDL. What does actually They and You means

And what does this sentence means If they redistribute the image as part of another work, they license that entire work under the GFDL?

  • Same thing with If they redistribute the image as part of another work, they license that work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or a compatible license. ( Creative Commons Attribution). Can you please bit explain to me. I'll be happy for that --NAHID 23:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Please visit Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. I left messages. thanks --NAHID 23:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Stress

Actually I'm feeling too much Stress :(. New things come to my mind again and again. My damn brain isn't getting tried. I'm trying to control myself (But most of the time I fail to control.. off). Thank you. --NAHID 10:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I'll copy it (User:Megapixie/CopyrightFlowChart) to my userpage (in resource section). It's most helpful but we can't use template image in subpage and we can't categorized it. You mentioned template images in subpage. By the way, I wanted know the above meanings that I left you. Thanks--NAHID 10:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Screeshot

You said, if you are uploading a screenshot from the film Mission Impossible to show what Tom Cruise looks like, then that wouldn't be fair use. However if you are uploading an image from the end of 2001 to show what the trippy special effects look like, that would be fair use. Please clarify a bit regarding on this image Image:Najimy MaryPatrick.jpg. It's used in biography of Kathy Najimy. Shouldn't it replaceable (This screenshot should be used on the film right) Please explain it to me--NAHID 10:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Please answer me
That - IMHO would be replaceable fair use. The image itself isn't being commented on criticially and it isn't essential to the article. BUT not everyone agrees on this interpretation of policy. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Chowbok for an example of such a dispute. Megapixie 20:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Pizza Hut

Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Advertising Image 2 and Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Promotional and Promophoto- I should've mentioned this advertisement imageImage:Pizzahutpanpizza.JPG. It's being used in artticle Pizza hut. Do you think, it'd be okay to add advert image in organization's article. If not then why?--NAHID 20:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Free image resources

Above link mention some weblinks and refers that any user can upload images from those websites. As a example ,I found this link [Tennis]. If I upload an image from this link then what could be the license?? Same thing with other links. But most of the links don't mention anything like "free license" and "you may use this for any purpose". Then shouldn't those links be removed from Wikipedia:Free image resources--NAHID 20:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Tagging

Megapixie, From above link you were wrong about that image(Image:Bashundhara city.jpg), again I left message in above link. Please don't get annoyed here. I left another message here Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Permission link based on above link for more clarification.Thanks--NAHID 11:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience

The Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience
I hereby give you this award for dealing with NAHID's seemingly endless, confusing, redundant and off-the-wall questions at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions where others may have lost it (I would have). Keep up the good work. --MECU≈talk 18:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi !

AfD nomination of
1944 D-Day Operation Overlord

An article that you have been involved in editing,

1944 D-Day Operation Overlord, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1944 D-Day Operation Overlord
. Thank you.

RE: FYI

User:Jord/ArbCom-Abu badali. Thought you should know. Megapixie 03:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I hope this could be more constructive than previous attempts. But unfortunately, it seems it's not having a good start. --Abu badali (talk) 15:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

M86

I did not understand why you reverted my edits. At the very least, the textual descriptions of the entries and the change to the obsolete link to

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)
, "In most cases, place the items in order of usage, with the most-used meanings appearing at the top and less common meanings below." A Google search on "M86" lists the galaxy first and the landmine second. Therefore, the galaxy should be first and the landmine second in the disambiguation list. What was your interpretation of the rule?

Please discuss this with me further. I will revert the edits on 17 Mar 2007 if I receive no response. Dr. Submillimeter 08:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I am going to revert
MoS:DAB, which worries me. Thank you for at least explaining your viewpoint. Dr. Submillimeter
13:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Revived discussion concerning fair use in portals

I am contacting everyone who participated in

new amendment and you like you to weigh in so that we may actually have a consensus on this matter as it doesn't seem there exists one either way. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria

What would be the copyright status of a collage?

If I made photo collage of copyrighted images what would be the copyright implications? Please, answer to my talk page. Aditya Kabir 15:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Scream 4

Yeah, that's what I meant. Thanks for letting me know! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 01:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:NewRhodesBand.jpg

Thanks for uploading

first fair use criterion
in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Megapixie 10:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Re : Late for the Sky was just deleted

Ah yes, you're right. I've

Mailer Diablo
14:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

FARC-EP images

Hi. I undid the ips changes to the tags back to PD-DOJ; although I think s/he made a good point, it's all rather speculative and since it appears on the dea.gov without qualifications, I doubt it will ever be contested (least of all by the FARC-EP!). Regards, El_C 22:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Gliders

Hi Megapixie - nice work on the various gliders you're adding! It would be really helpful if when you add a new aircraft, you check to see whether it's on the List of aircraft, and if not, please add it. Cheers --Rlandmann 13:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Film perfs image

Well done on the image! I have one critique, though - the BH perf is wrong - it's .110 from middle of the sides to the opposite top corner. I don't know why it's defined like that, but that is how it is. Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola 13:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I must have used a bad source, then. I would agree that deference to Kodak probably is best. Thanks for that! Girolamo Savonarola 14:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Asking for help

Good daytime! May I ask you to help with proper English grammar in the 152 mm howitzer M1943 (D-1) article? All major contributors (Balcer, Bukvoed and me) of this article are all non-native English speakers but the article (it seems to me) has potential for nominating for A-class in Military Portal. The needed condition is a proper English grammar and we are all searching the person who can help. I see that you are interested in Soviet artillery and hope for help. Thanks aforehead, LostArtilleryman 17:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Great thank you for your work! Some minor remarks considering the article: I've added links and some info to the non-obvious facts and in trivia item No. 4 about Finnish Museum is not so trivial. Finnish Forces captured a lot of very rare guns (and other equipment) which are now in Museums but D-1 was not so rare such as T-50 light tank for example, but Finns cannot capture it in good conditions or buy it in peace time later. And now how we can request reassession for A-class? LostArtilleryman 06:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Megapixie, thanks a lot for your help.
The process of requesting an A-class review is described here:
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Review#A-Class_review
.
As for the trivia item in question, I don't find it interesting enough or special enough, IMHO it should be removed. Bukvoed 06:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

After peer review Bukvoed with me slightly modified the article to take into account peer's remarks and I am once again asking your greatly appreciated help for English grammar check. Thanks aforehead, LostArtilleryman 17:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: You've tagged a number of images as © Government of Saskatchewan

I'll put some detailed information on the images within the next couple days. Just don't delete them before then. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 07:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

No content in Category:World War I weapons of Germany

CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:World War I weapons of Germany, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:World War I weapons of Germany itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2
21:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Bill O'Reilly pic

Hi. Thanks for putting in the url for Image:Bill O'Reilly (commentator).jpg, which I forget in my rush (even though I was at the same page). Also, I noticed you uploaded the high res version, which is great, but I'm curious: Do you have a link to the high res version. I looked, and couldn't find one. Anyways, it's no big deal. I'm asking, since I'm curious, how you managed to find the high res version, which I couldn't. --Rob 02:27, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

A request

Greetings. There is a debate at

Wikipedia:Fair use review#12 June 2007 about an image of Peter Nordin. Your input there would be appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (random
) 14:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I left that note back when I thought a show of consensus would improve things. Now I guess non-feeding is best. Thanks, – Quadell (talk) (random) 23:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

re:image problem

I asked him to give me his permission to use Su-25 images taken by him on Wikipedia, and he accepted. That's all. I don't mind if you change the copyright tag into a proper one, I'm not an expert on image copyright tagging. --

Eurocopter tigre
08:45, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

But we are not going to modify the image, right? Why we are supposed to modify it? This is becoming really stupid if the permission of the author isn't enough to post an image on Wikipedia. No offense, --
Eurocopter tigre
22:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Asked if he gives me his permission to use Su-25 images made by him, David Modry replied: Greet. "If bring in my full name and server, from whose photo take over, so all right."

--

Eurocopter tigre
22:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't an {{
Eurocopter tigre
23:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Ohh, ok, that's it. Looks like we'll have to find another cockpit image. Again, how are the images supposed to be modified? --
Eurocopter tigre
23:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I sended an email to the other photographers and asked them if the {{

Eurocopter tigre
23:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:USB Icon.svg

As I meant to say in the explanation there - the reason that image is replaceable is that the one article that uses it can just use

CBM · talk
) 06:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Airliners.net

Yes Megapixie, I sended a second email to the photographers and asked them to confirm if the current copyright tag is acceptable for them. I'm absolutely sure that everything is ok. Cheers, --

Eurocopter tigre
22:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For your excellent work on the issue of the copyright status of pre-1955 photos from the Australian War Memorial's database. I really appreciate the constructive and positive approach you've taken to this issue. --

Nick Dowling
09:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Best. Checkin. Comment. EVAR!

Do they have a barnstar for that? If they do, I'm granting it to you! It's so zen... one word, but it said so much. Maury 03:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Filmmaking Announcement

A

WikiProject Films is under consideration. All opinions and questions are strongly encouraged! Girolamo Savonarola
01:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:FUR expedited request

I see you participate in

tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
) 14:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm astonished

I'm astonished right now. Accusing someone of writing a hoax is an assumption of bad faith to say the least, and accusing a relatively well-known institution of not existing at all is quite the allegation. On what basis are you challenging the existence of this university? This link and this link offer just a bit of counter-evidence.

Please explain why you think FUTO is fake, and why, even if it was fake, this would have anything to do with a 419 (not 411) scam. Picaroon (t) 20:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Great croping. Thanks for your working.

Take care of yourself

Teşekkürler, iyi çalışmalar. XD kızılsungur 03:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Megapixie/2&oldid=1141858354"