User talk:MECU/Archive/Archive-Jan2007

Six Walks in the Fictional Woods

Please check over carefully the SWAP you have made over the image.

The image I Uploaded is totally different - that's why I deliberately ECHO-ed

Umberto Eco's name: Umberto EcoEco. --Ludvikus 17:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Umberto Eco vs. Umberto Eco Eco

Here's the image I want:

Yours truly,--Ludvikus 18:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

---

So you don't see the difference you say? Well why don't you just look!!!

right

Yours truly,--Ludvikus 18:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Image-No-nazism01.png

Regarding your nomination of the above, images that fall under a public domain or GFDL-like license can be used in templates. If you are being as ridged on the application of WP:NOT#BLOG as it seems, perhaps you should start by nominating all the images used on your user page. Images that are uploaded and not used should be deleted as orphans. Excessive use of images on a user page can be an issue, but much more leeway is given to user pages, see WP:USER. You may end up stirring up much ill will once you start nominating free images used in templates and/or user boxes. My suggestion to you, for what it is worth, would be to withdrawl the above image's nomination.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 19:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Im--IPutAwayaTener 17:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)age:Singapore Girl.jpg

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 13:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

This pic is taken from the flickr album of CorePrime and the source has been cite, hope this clears the problems, thank you. Sorry if i didnt tag the image earlier on with fuller details. {{Non-free fair use in|singaporeair}}YuRiPa 14:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

3 questions

Thanks for the welcome to Wikipedia! I am reading all I can and trying to learn the ropes, while just making comments on talk pages. Meanwhile, I know I can contribute small articles on several subjects, starting with synopses of Star Trek novels. Seems like a safe place to start. My 3 questions: 1) Would it be better to use Wiki to create the document, or write it separately in (good old familiar) Word and paste it in when ready? 2) Is there a more efficient way to check for answers to this type of comment than by placing it on my "watch" list? and 3) When I need help, should I type the special "help me" you indicated, with the double parenthesis, on my "my talk" page, or on whatever page I'm needing help with?Soltera 19:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline

Hi. I'm posting this on your talk page because I have noticed that you are often active in one or more aspects of our image use and/or image deletion processes.

I would like to propose Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline as a guideline to detail the necessary components of a "non-free image use", or "fair use", rationale. At present, it's kindof a moving target. Some image description pages have a detailed, bulleted rationale, while others have a one sentence "this picture identifies the subject". Patroling Category:All images with no fair use rationale, I've seen image pages that explicitly have something of a rationale that have been nominated for a speedy.

This is not an attempt to change or influence the image use policy in any way - and I would like to steer it away from becoming a rehash of the arguments over recent changes to the fair use policy. The only purpose of this guideline is to assist users who upload fair use images in correctly and adequately documenting what they feel to be the rationale for using the images.

So I would like for us to formalize what is required. I have also created Template:Fair use rationale and I would like to propose that we use it or something similar as a template to assist users in creating an acceptable rationale. I have no particular attachment to the proposal as it stands now - I have created it only as a starting point. Please see Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline and the associated talk page to give your thoughts and ideas. Thank you. BigDT 19:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Template question

Mecu, got a quick template question for you. I'm looking through the Collegebowl template on your userspace and I see a lot of html comment lines (<!-- -->). They are empty. What is the purpose of these? I understand that if you wanted to leave a comment or note in the template invisible when viewing the template, you'd use this, but they are all blank. Didn't know if I was missing something. Thanks in advance.--NMajdan•talk 00:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I've never noticed an issue before. I modified your collegebowl template and removed the html tags and the comment tags. You can see mine at: User:Nmajdan/Collegebowl. I copied your page over to my userspace so my template is using the same criteria yours is and mine has some more fields visible than yours. Don't know whats wrong on yours. Let me know what you think.--NMajdan•talk 01:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the {{!}} template makes things a lot easier and obviously it renders in MediaWiki better than HTML. I've added some more to my template including the previous season's matchup and the next matchup (which you already had).--NMajdan•talk 14:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Use of WP:IAR

I am almost sorry I introduced WP:IAR to you. I would suggest to you that you are missing the point of the policy. By using it to not notify an uploader that the image has been nominated for deletion, you are actually harming wikipedia by breeding possible ill-will with new users. The nomination process at IfD is a three step process by concensus. The third step is the notification of the uploader.

If you would like to see that step dropped from the process, start a discussion about it on the talk page. Perhpas there are many peeople like yourself that would like to see it dropped, but given the fact that most nominators here do advise the uploader I would think it might be an uphill challenge.

The policy states, if it "prevent[s] you from improving or maintaining" to ignore the rules; my claim is that not following the "rules" you are not improving but breeding distrust.

I would ask that you please notify uploaders on future nominations; I am going to be adding the notices to the user's talk pages for those you have not and make note in each nomination.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 02:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 18th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 51	18 December 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: Holiday publication
Elections conclude, arbitrators to be chosen	Wikimedia Foundation fundraiser opens
WikiWorld comic: "Dr. Seuss"	News and notes: Fundraiser plans, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:29 the cat.JPG

I removed the speedy tag from that image. "illegal activity" is not a speedy delete criteria. Feel free to send it to WP:IFD however. ---J.S ^(T/C) 06:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

3 questions answered!

Thanks a million, MECU, for the help getting started. Looks like MSWord will be useful at first, but I'll sure try the sandbox, etc. Yes, that's what I meant about the watch list (and I suppose by your answer it's okay to use "my" page as a repository for a few links to favorite Wiki sites - this is just my office computer and it's problematic to use internet bookmarks as I use 3 or 4 different computers in the course of each day). I have a "help me" on the talk page now, so I'll see how to get those answered shortly. Cheers! Soltera 17:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

BreakwaterSchool.jpg

Thank you for the explanation of why the link was removed. If the school has a picture that it wishes used, which is also currently used on its web site, and the school is willing to release the picture into the public domain (as the owner of the original picture), can I use such a picture? If so, would I be specifying a differnet type of license? Thanks again. GWF54 20:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)GWF54

Image:Boonestutz.jpg

I think that applying the {{db-noncom}} template is exactly correct. I would also add {{Permission from license selector}} to the image page. Based on the user's talk page, back on Nov 22nd someone spoke with him about correct tagging (rather then just a template notification). Also, have a look at his upload log [1]] and you will see a number of images in the same category and a few that have already been deleted.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 23:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and still trying to get the hang of it. I am using this image with the permission of AggieAthletics.com. I will try to upload it again with the proper template. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do. Thank you for your help!>PSully (talk)

RE: Fair use rationale for Image:WallaceMike CPC.jpg

But I tagged it. It's no different than the image at Paddy Torsney, yet that image is apparently ok. --James Duggan 06:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Matt Smith (musician) deletion

Well thanks for giving me time to respond... I'd like to know why it was even put up for deletion and then deleted, he is a very talanted musician and his band has had a major record release and it has it's own page so why can't he? The band also has played in a noteable national music festival, so why is it not notable? I request that the article be put back on. --E tac 07:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I told you why it is noteable, the article itself stated why he IS noteable. All you told me is that you don't think it is without giving a reason. I told you they played at ProgPower, which is generally as high as you can get in the USA playing this type of music. Oh and on a poll of the top Christian metal albums of all time it placed in the Top 10 link here. So if Christian metal is a noteable article I'd think that a fairly new group which is that highly thought of by fans of the genre should have an article and the musician who recorded the entire debut by himself should qualify for having a page aso. If it isn't noteable then pretty much any metal band or musician in those genres is not noteable since they will never achieve huge commercial success. Is that what wikipedia is about? Noteable = Commercial success? Then you may as well put up half the bands on wiki up for deletion. --E tac 22:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Jack*

I'm sorry, I adopted him. Merry christmas!--§Sir James Paul<<--wikiholic§ 15:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

§Sir James Paul<<--wikiholic§ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

My ER

A) I understand that I am not all that active; that is because I only have a few days a week to really edit due to 1) my dad's internet sucking and 2)school.
B) I also know I have few talk edits; but as mostly a WikiGnome, I have little to talk about.
C) What's with the focus on FAs and GAs in RfAs?
Thanks. --teh tennisman 17:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the added bit on my talk page. I feel like I really can make it if I can get better internet, so hopefully I can make more edits and help make wikipedia a better place. If I decide to run for RfA, I'll let you know; it probably will not be until sometime next year when I have made more edits and become a FA or GA writer. Thanks again, teh tennisman 18:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar thanks

Thank you very much! howcheng {chat} 17:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Chuck Amato-NC State.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Chuck Amato-NC State.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — BigDT 20:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey ... I didn't notice that you had uploaded it until I hit the button ... honestly, replaceability and all that stuff aside, this photo just looks bad and I strongly suggest that having no photo there is better than this one. BigDT 20:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

§Sir James Paul<<--wikiholic§ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Image:DominicJanes.jpg

Whoops. Sorry. I put the wrong tag in. Thanks for the heads-up! ~ PHDrillSergeant...§ 01:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'm confoozed. If it was released freely out of IMDb for use as a promotional/modeling image of the actor himself, what is the proper tag? ~ PHDrillSergeant...§ 01:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

WHOA. It's gone. It was there this morning. Seriously creepy internet stuff. I guess the image goes to Speedy Deletion then. ~ PHDrillSergeant...§ 01:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't bite

Several points to make:

1. By welcoming someone, you are assuming good faith regardless of their first few edits
2. Because you mention {{db-attack}}, I assume you do not think the image is himself
3. Perhaps the editor is an excited youth, he is making his mark, but by welcoming him the community may be able to rein in any distructive behaviour and channel it into productivity; finding his first edit deleted will not help bring him around

I agree that the image likely has no use, but it is presumiably free content and perhaps the user would like it on his user page. My point is, 8 hours is a very short time and we have processes to handle disruptive editors should it turn out that this is all the user is interested in. I think the phrase, "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar" is apt. --Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 01:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use

As this athlete has died a free alternative can no longer be created, cheers. SportsAddicted | discuss 02:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Templates

Mecu: On the WikiProject College football Participant List, I noticed that you list template work as a specialty. Recently, I have begun an ambitious process of summarizing every season of Georgia Bulldogs football in articles like this (just started this one). The probalem that I've started running into is that I keep tweaking the table that I'm using to record all the games of the season. With 30+ tables already created, it has already become a pain to go back and fix earlier tables. For example, the first tables I did were like the one here and the most recent (and now favored) tables look like the ones here. What I am now wondering is if this is the sort of task that could be made easier by a template. It may be quite hard to develop one since a single season can have anywhere from 2 to 10 games, plus bowls. If you think this is doable, please respond here on the Project talk page or on my talk page. Thanks. --Tlmclain | Talk 01:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to respond with a quick note. This isn't to take away from any response Mecu has but since you're new I wanted to fill you in. The WikiProject has a standard format for game schedules. You can view it here: Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Yearly team pages format#Schedule.--NMajdan•talk 02:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio vs OR

Hi. I just say one of your noms, and while it is a copyvio, it's not OR (what could it mean for this image?). Just thought you might want to know that. Cheers. Xiner (talk, email) 16:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Editor review

Hi. I read your editor review. I knew that user subpages could be deleted, I just didn't really realize that the sentence was false. And the nonsense edit was in a vandal sandbox (that of Can't sleep, clown will eat me). However, I understand your point, and the points of all the users who made editor reviews. Thanks for the review, by the way. SupaStarGirl 19:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

RE: Editor Review

No problem. You do good work, you may as well hear about it. z4ns4tsu\^talk 21:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Joantipon.jpg

how do i delete the image? i will replace it as soon as i get a free alternative. thanks for the note. --RebSkii 22:58, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

A page just for you :)

Your idea has been enacted upon - and I will think in the next few weeks will really take off. Cheers see and add info here [[Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters]] Lethaniol 17:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Dennis Erickson

I am assuming that this edit to Dennis Erickson was an accident? You removed a lot more than just the image and the caption. I reverted it (but left off the image and caption as you originally intended) VegaDark 23:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Agathoclea's RfA

Hello, and thank you for the support on my recent RfA. The final tally was 63/3/2, and I have now been entrusted with the mop. I hope I can live up to your trust, and certainly welcome any and all feedback. All the best, and thanks again! — Agathoclea 13:27, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Mecu/monobook.js

It's showing up in CAT:CSD. I'm not quite sure how to deal with it, but I figured I'd give you the heads up. alphachimp. 22:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Singil Station

Greetings -- you left a note on my Talk page about Singil Station's AFD, but as far as I can see I've never touched the page. Did you by chance mean some other article instead? Jpatokal 01:43, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 26th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 52	26 December 2006	About the Signpost

Seven arbitrators chosen	Wikipedia classroom assignments on the rise
WikiWorld comic: "Molasses"	News and notes: Stewards appointed, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Paul Johnson football coach.jpg

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

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{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. - crz crztalk 18:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Adoption

I've been here for a while and I didn't know that button existed! Well judging by your spiffy page, I think you'd be a great fit to mentor me :D --Sergiusz Szczebrzeszyński ^{|talk to me||what i've done||e|} 15:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't quite understand how that archive thing works, though I think I'd prefer an automated system. Yes, I do want to get involved more in Wikipedia, but I'm not sure exactly what I could do. I mean, I've made various spelling revision, reverted vandalism, translated from x language to english, but none of this seems to have a HUGE effect on a page. Thanks for the help -Sergiusz Szczebrzeszyński ^{|talk to me||what i've done||e|} 16:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

WOW, Thanks so much!!! That really helped a lot, I didn't realize there were SO many things on here. I found the pages needing translation and proofreading of translations. I can't thank you enough! :D --Sergiusz Szczebrzeszyński ^{|talk to me||what i've done||e|} 16:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

About JJBorrelli.jpg

Well, there are no free images about this player in any site (Juan Jose Borrelli) so I decided to scan a old magazine and upload the photo here. What tag should I place?--KaragouniS 21:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

..for Your critics. Although You could've freely been more harsh. :) The reason why I get involved in controversial topics (from time to time) is because I want to solve them; and just hate injustice when I see it. And in such cases I always assert a very strong position, strictly abide & quote Wikipedia's policy like a Knight (and although I believe that such radicalism is essentially wrong, I do it anyway). It's because of that that I've been called a Greater-Serb Chetnik, a nationalist Ustasha, etc... For example, the sources for Rudjer Boskovic's father being Croat are overwhelming compared to the Serbian claim, which lies more in POVish nationalist irridenta - and that is combined with other nationalisms there (Italian). I'm not negating the existence Croatian nationalist claims (POV), but everything I stand for over there abides Wikipedia's NOR and CITE policies. A good "other side" to that is me fighting a Croat [[internet troll troll]] that keeps returning to menace some of the articles I write and drops a death threat now & there... so I tend to draw the middle. The reason for such a large number of talk page edits is because I like to discuss articles with other editors, to the full ends of every single word the articles have! Cheers, --PaxEquilibrium 21:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Uh, actually, I was commenting that You should've freely been more harsh. :) --PaxEquilibrium 21:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Blue Buffaloes

helmethut.com click on the image of 1981 and 82-84 Smith03 19:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:13 5.jpg

I don't remember why I uploaded the same image with different titles twice. This image probably should be gone. mirageinred 04:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Dick DeBartolo

Rationale added. Also see Image talk:140 ddb-aen.gif. Pepso 06:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Recent IfD nominations

Please note that any image nomination at IfD is a three step process after adding the {{ifd}} template to the image page.

1. Notifiy the uploader
2. Tag any pages that the image is used on if it is not an orphan
3. Add to the IfD page.

Several nominations you have done today have not completed step two; I have now done that for you and added a comment on the IfD section. The nomination tool is a very helpful bit of programming, but please note that it will not replace knowing, understanding and applying the policy/guidelines around images. If there are any questions, please let me know.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 21:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The same applies to, for example, Image:3d whole wheat box.jpg, which you nominated today. Unlike Gay Cdn, I have not completed step two for you, because I'm lazy. Martin 16:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, you appear to be tagging images for speedy deletion using a tag that only applies to images after May 2006, when the image was uploaded prior to May 2006. Martin 16:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Help with no rationale images

The only mechanism we have at this point that I know of is to place the images on WP:IFD -Regards Nv8200p talk 17:30, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanx

Thank you for letting me know, I have fixed the license of that picture. Happy editing!!! --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{Walkie-talkie} 21:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Image Replacability

This image is about a living author.

I found the image on the WEB where it's used to promote the book, I believe.

The image could probably be replaced by going to Israel (I'm in the USA) with a camera.

So what should be dome about it's use, Fair use, or otherwise?

The image in question is Image:906365 -Hadassa Ben-Itto-.jpg.

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 22:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

---

I hear you? And I really do not needed that particular image. Just an image of her, any!

So can't we keep it until such time as some finds another?

Also, I believe the holder of the image is the promoter of her book, the publisher.

So who's going to ask for permission of use in Wiki? And how do you do it?

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 23:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for formatting the 2007 Rose Bowl article. I do the best I can to portray the information. Sorry, gotta go! Sr13 (T|C) 01:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Amiri_Baraka.jpg flagged for possible copyright violation

i don't understand why you flagged this image for "possible copyright violation." the author, whose name is provided only as "opacity," has listed the image on flickr.com as released under the "creative commons" license; i provided attribution and linked to the image's source. i would appreciate any feedback, as i'm trying to improve my understanding of wikipedia's conventions, and spent a lot of time looking for a photo that did not appear to be subject to "copyright" laws... America jones 22:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Darrent Williams

Re [2], how's an newswire image, from which the newswire wishes to make money, is better from a fair use perspective than an ESPN image to which the league owns the copyright, which was being used to promote the athlete, and which was not being sold to newspapers etc.? And why do I detect animosity in your edit summary? - crz crztalk 01:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Ouch! I'll go delete "my" image. - crz crztalk 02:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Template

Hi Mecu, I copied that template from the Michigan template with the intent of putting it in the 2005 UT artile. Then I got busy copyeditting that article and never got back to the template. I am still toying with the idea of putting it in, but the article is so long already. If you don't mind just leaving it for a while until the peer review is over I'd appreciate it. If we end up not using it, I can just delete it myself as the only author. Best, Johntex\^talk 02:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

My fair use images

Any fair use images I have uploaded that are not in use in an article you can go ahead and delete now. These are photos that I uploaded and later cropped or fixed in whatever way, and re-uploaded in the "fixed" version.

I dont think I have any fair use images on my user page that are not in use in an article.

Mrlopez2681 04:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Mass tagging

• Image:Abdurrahman YALÇINKAYA.png

You seem to be mass tagging images w/o fair use rationales. Feel free to delete them as I cant be bothered to write a rationale, you do not even need to notify me. --Cat out 17:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

As per your notices on my talk page, take note that all of the images you listed are double-tagged with fair-use and with the original license of ww2.pl. The reason for double-tagging was that some copyright enthusiasts (to name them mildly) have argued that the original license was not enough and that it was better to add another tag just in case. However, since then I received triple confirmation that the guys from the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (the owners of the sites) have no problem whatsoever with us using the pics from their site. In fact one of the guys to confirm that has become a deputy minister in the chancellery of the Polish Prime Minister, so I'd say his word is quite valid. If you have a problem with the fair-use tags, feel free to remove them and leave only the {{PolandGov}} tag, as it's perfectly ok. //Halibutt 20:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Amiri_Baraka.jpg

thanks for the feedback on the copyright status of this image America jones 18:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

College football barnstar

		The College football Barnstar
		I, BigDT, present you with the new college football barnstar for your phenomenal work with college football articles this season. BigDT 22:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

College football team infoboxes

I have a sort of random question for you. Several college football team pages, such as Ohio State and USC, have a new standardized infobox. I'd like to include the team's helmet along with the logo, as I have been doing in pages that do not have this infobox. The creator of "The Helmet Project" says at the end of his disclaimer "I consider a few dozen images up to a hundred or so to be an acceptable number to use; many more than that is not." I feel that fits within the scope of the project and would like to modify the infobox template accordingly. Do you know how I could go about doing that? Thanks!Football79 02:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use message

Thanks for that - I forgot all about those images (I uploaded them when I was a newbie here). There was a couple more, so I had those and the one you originally messaged me about speedy deleted. Thanks for your message, Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 02:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: All-High Stadium - The Natural

Since it's your opinion that a free image can easily be found, then you had best get busy finding one. Wahkeenah 02:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Listen up: I am getting VERY TIRED of you wiki-busybodies trying to get OTHERS to do your work for you. Since YOU are the one that has a problem with it, and YOU claim it is easy to find a replacement, then it is up to YOU to look for one. Wahkeenah 02:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• And by the way, I have news for you... I looked ALL OVER THE INTERNET trying to find a photo instead of this one. NADA. And I am not about to drive 1,000 miles to take a personal photo. Your claim that it should be easy to find is NOT TRUE. Wahkeenah 02:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• I could post the above complaint, except that the place the link sends me to is a blind alley. Don't try to hide behind wikipedia policy. No one forced you to mess with this. The problem is YOU. Wahkeenah 02:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• I posted a comment about on the picture page, which I guess is what you want done. And don't go lecturing me about civility. YOU STARTED IT. One more thing: Never contact me again for any reason. Wahkeenah 02:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• I figured out what set me off. You tagged the item and then put a message on my talk page. Why didn't you ask me first? Then we could have discussed the matter in a civilized way. Wahkeenah 03:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Also, your argument is absurd. You have pretty well ruined my evening. Why don't you just delete it now and get it over with? Wahkeenah 03:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• You and your superior attitude have wasted enough of my time already. I have removed the picture from the article and am no longer watching the picture page. You win. Wahkeenah 03:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Hold the phone. The photo depicts the stadium as it looked in the movie. From what I can tell, the stadium does not actually look like that, it was mocked up in post-production for the movie. Therefore, it is NOT replaceable. It can only be found in the movie. The article discusses this. Take away your deletion posting, or I'll do it for you. Wahkeenah 03:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• You're missing the point. The image in the film was mocked-up to vaguely resemble the Chicago ballparks. The real stadium bears no resemblance at all. I'm guessing you've never seen the film. Wahkeenah 04:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use?

Hi. You just added a fair use template in my user talk, however, you didn't add any image to the template so I don't know what you are talking about. Can you please link me to the image. I would be glad to check its fair use status.--enano ^(Talk) 04:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

College football team infoboxes

Thanks for your quick reply. Here is a sample of the infoboxes some team pages have on it:

MECU/Archive/Archive-Jan2007

If we can edit this to include helmets and not just a logo, I think it would really spruce things up. Most prominent programs already have infobox in their pages. The URL for the Helmet Project is http://nationalchamps.net/Helmet_Project/index.htm. The section of the site in regards to sharing can be found near the bottom under "What's in it for you."Football79 05:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use

• Please stop leaving me these spam messages regarding replacable fair use. If they really are replacable, you could at least provide the image you want to use as a replacement. If you only think they are replacable- then look for one yourself. Astrotrain 12:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

You're Wrong About Margo Smith and I'm Right

I highly suggest you check out the Margo Smith's page. A new image is at the bottom of the article, proving that I'm right and you're wrong. So yes, this is an album cover for Margo Smith's most recent album "Nothing to Lose", which has been her first album in many years. The album cover photo was taken at Smith's estate. This image is from CMT.com. You know Mecu, you really should check your sources before blaming other people, instead of being lazy and deciding not to do anything about it. I would like an apology. LovePatsyCline 23:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Response on Margo Smith

Well if you want to be so exact about such things, fine. However, that is the CD cover whether you think so or not. Fine, go and delete the old image, just make sure you keep the new image I have just uploaded. I am sorry that you simply can not trust anyone on Wikipedia to upload images. Keep the newest image of that album, please, it is best for Margo Smith's article. After all, there would be no Margo Smith article if I never created one. Now that doesn't mean go bother me some more because I created the article, just becuase you have been at Wikipedia longer than I have and like to pick on "newer users". Margo Smith was a very important figure in Country Music, and I find it important that I have created her article. LovePatsyCline 23:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Margo Smith Image

I find nothing wrong with the copyright status of Margo Smith's image. It is on her 2005 album cover of Nothing to Lose and I'm serious. Plus it is one of the few current pictures of Ms. Smith. If want to know so much about the image, I suggest you go to it source (which is www.margosmith.com) and find it out there. Then comeback and respond on my talk page. LovePatsyCline 21:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:Law enforcement

Hello,

I understand you are "adept at creating template code" and was wondering if you could do a favour for the Law Enforcement wikiproject by taking a look at our template.

You see, we have an 'article watch' system where articles which have vandalism, edit wars and so on are added. It can be found here. I was hoping that our project banner template could have a function where you type "article-watch=yes" into the {{Law enforcement}} to produce a small "more information" drop down bar exactly the same as the existing "peer review" one, which would state the following:

"This article is being [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Law Enforcement/No vandalism, no conflict#Article Watch|watched]] due to vandalism, edit wars or poor wikiquette."

And where it would normally say PEER if it could say [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Law Enforcement/No vandalism, no conflict|NVNC]]

What do you think? would you be able to create that for us? If it is even possible? If you are kind enough to accept and have any questions, you can leave a message on my talk page of course, many thanks and kind regards, SGGH 23:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

That's BRILLIANT! Cheers! While i dont think a catagory will be needed at the moment due to the low volume of articles being watching, we might as well have one in case demand picks up, perhaps "Law Enforcement Articles Under Article Watch"? Once again, REALLy brilliant work! Many thanks! SGGH 10:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

		The Template Barnstar
		For very quickly granting my request to help solve code problems with the Law Enforcement Wikiproject's banner template code. While he had no obligation to help me out, Mecu re-wrote it and saved it in record time, and it works perfectly! Many thanks SGGH 15:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

LOL! No problem, sorry for copying in the wrong code for the barnstar I planned to use! SGGH 15:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Image move to commons - Paris metro

Mecu,

Thanks a lot for moving those - someone had asked me to do it before the new year, and I just didn't have the time to get around to it. Fact is I was looking to upload the originals, but not that you've done it you've saved me the trouble of having to find them again. Thanks a million.

THEPROMENADER 18:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

As I said to you before, there are not any fair use images on my user page that are not in use in an article (there are maybe only 3 or 4 photos that are fair use - I went through all of them earlier).

Now is there a rule that says that fair use images ARE NOT ALLOWED to be put up on a user page?

will you live it alone? Im going throgh them right now, its easier when I can see them - just give me 20 minutes.

My user page is now free of fair use images. --Mrlopez2681 03:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The Helmet Project

Thank you for your prompt and thorough response. It might take me awhile to get my house in order, so I'm not sure when this will get done. There's a lot more to it than I thought. Talk at you later.Football79 04:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Speaker

Why do you want to delete that? \It's a nice drawing i made. RocketMaster 04:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Uni of wales.jpg)

The image was originally used in the template for the university of Wales but somebody deleted it from the template indicating that using the image in that way was not fair use. The template was only used in a handful of institutions that are connected to the university of Wales. If you don't think it would be fair use in the template either, and since it's not being used anywhere else, I have no objections to the image being deleted. (Sloman 11:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC))

Image:Alison-whyte-tamsin-lewis-d.jpg

I can't find a fair use image and she seems to have semi-retired so do not expect any new images —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Juntung (talk • contribs) 13:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

Image:Alison-whyte-tamsin-lewis-d.jpg

I can't find a fair use image and she seems to have semi-retired so do not expect any new images --JuntungWu 13:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

awww...my adoption

i have done numerous edits, but feel that i could be a better and stronger editor. i appreciate you taking me under your wings.The undertow 11:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Mecu - i have comprised a stub about 'legal secretary.' should i put it on my user page while i continue edits, or officially list it for others to revise? any help would be appreciated. The undertow 08:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

did you say "beer+Wikipedia?" no wonder you are my mentor :p The undertow 11:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

can you help me with car salesman? this article is so poorly written that i would actually rather see it deleted. i cannot assert that i can recreate a better article, but the format alone is deplorable. any ideas? The undertow 12:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Deeping map.PNG

Sorry about that, the image can be deleted. I never got round to using it for my purpose and it is of a low quality anyway. Sorry to have been a bother. Lofty 19:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Mass tagging is starting to bother me

Not that I oppose what you are doing (nor support). I feel you are overloading image for deletion process. --Cat out 00:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not my intention to overload IFD. I do try to use alternate methods when they apply, but going through orphaned images, most are classified GDFL but have no encyclopedic value. I don't know what else to do. I could limit myself to only looking at so many pictures per day, but that doesn't seem appropriate. I did think that it might be a good idea for a new CSD category, that orphaned images could be tagged as orphan, the uploader notified and after 90 (or 180, or...?) days, if it's still orphaned, then it's deleted. It would remove it the process from IFD on most OR images. And anyone could look at any of the categories of tagged OR images such that they could de-orphan it. The problem is that the 90 (or whatever) days the orphaned images are there would take a long delay and many would likely complain about the number of days or that we still might delete images that are useful, despite them having lots of time to save them. Anyways, if you have any other input or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks. --MECU≈talk 01:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

A suggestion: You can move them to commons. A use for them can be found on a variety of projects such as wikinews or wikibooks among others. We are looking for more images on commons after all. --Cat out 01:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah and btw there are tools to help you move images to commons. --Cat out 01:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

What tools are available? My initial thoughts would be that only images that have value should be used in an article and therefore moved to Wikipedia. I guess there's another line between useful and just completely userful. Anyways, can you give me a link to the tools? Hopefully, they can autotag or something. Thanks.--MECU≈talk 01:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

One of the tools I use is http://hdbot.velirat.de/ it is a commons uploader. It lets you copy an image to commons from wikipedia and tags the English copy for being a duplicate and even creates a button so you can delete the en copy. You can use all images on commons from en.wiki. This tool requires approval of the bot owner which you can catch on IRC.

I am aware that there are also some python bots doing the task as well although I never used them so I cant really comment on them.

Somewhat usefull images are ok on commons. Granted commons is not a webhost so the images being moved should have a potential value (someones pet dog may have an encyclopedic value (for say wikispecies) or a space shuttles debris (for say a wikinews article)) while not having a value for wikipedia. I haven't checked every image you are working on but I think you know what I mean so I wont bore you off with it. :)

--Cat out 01:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

some other comment

Sorry, why has my image been listed for deletion? --PopUpPirate 01:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Aye no probs nothing personal but I was hoping to use it on River Yarrow articles, uploaded the pic shortly after taking the photo. WP should be grateful for uploaded free use photos, whether they are linked or not :) --PopUpPirate 01:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

It'd be more proactive if you checked peeps carefully uploaded pics, and submitted them to commons if it bothers you so :) --PopUpPirate 01:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

about Image:0001v.jpg

My understanding is that the comic book was DONATED to the Fed govern, and thus Fed Gov copyright applies. This isn't right? See document context for statement of donation.--Smkolins 04:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned Finder images

Hi, Mecu. I noted the messages you left me on my talk page, and attempted to rectify the problem. I added fair use rationales to the photos and added them to the Macintosh Finder page: and plan on adding them to other pages where they belong. Please tell me if theres still anything I need to do so that these images wont qualify for deletion: as I feel that they are very good quality images: and shouldnt be taken off because of a technicality or oversite. :)

Thanks, --Alegoo92 05:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

mac80

its from a pdf file from the city of richmond, its government image, fair use, low res, just a crop

and please dont leave messages at the bottom of my talk page below the section that specifically says, dont leave messages here!qrc2006/email 05:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Al stewart orange album 1972.jpg)

Re:- Thanks for uploading Image:Al stewart orange album 1972.jpg. I notice the 'image' ...etc...Thank you. MECU≈talk 02:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hi MECU, thanks for the info'. It seems that the image (orignally included in Al Stewart ) has been replaced by another "fair use" item Image:AlStewart.jpg.

The new item is a more recent photo', but not an album cover, so I'm not sure how this fits in with current WIKI"fair use" policy. If the new one's ok from the legal aspect, I believe it's better than the one I uploaded and would have no objections to the latter being deleted. Regards, Wikityke 15:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

BBC ident images

Hi Mecu, thanks for letting me know about the images. At present, they are not being used in the BBC television idents article since it is in the process of being cleaned up following an AfD nomination. I have removed the images, listed them on a subpage of mine and tagged them as still in use since they are. I would be grateful if you could remove the orfud tags at present; once I have determined exactly which images are superfluous, I will tag them as orphaned fair use myself as I have already been doing. Thanks. Wikiwoohoo 17:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

You do have my word though I accept what you are saying. Wikiwoohoo 18:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

RPG image

Image:RPGs.jpg

I guess you missed this:

11th Marine Expeditionary Unit Explosive Ordnance Disposal team members inventory rocket propelled grenade launchers that were stockpiled along with other weapons and ammunition in Najaf, Iraq, by Muqtada al-Sadr's militia, Sept. 3, 2004. DoD photo by Chief Warrant Officer Matthew D. Middleton, U.S. Marine Corps. (Released)

Photo by: CWO2 MATTHEW D. MIDDLETON, 11TH MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT Record ID No. (VIRIN): 040903-M-1947M-030

What part of that is not a source? (and BTW all US gov images are PD) Riddley 18:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

What makes it necessarily from an internet source? Riddley 19:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh and just FYI, generally Marines don't like to be called Navy.  :) Riddley 19:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The DOD VIRIN number is right there (Visual Information Record Identification Numbers). Anybody can get a copy of the original image. Riddley 19:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

RFCurrent.jpg

Mecu, The image in question was taken from Robert Newton's The Encyclopedia of Robberies, Heists, and Capers which, as it belongs to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is in the public domain as a work by a federal agency. I assumed I'd used the approprite template however if there I'm not sure I understand the specific proplem regarding this image in reference to stating the source and copyright holder. I'd thought a description for its specific use was only for those images which were used under fair use policies whereas, in a public domain photo, an explanation would not be nessessary. I only ask as I'm not sure what changes need to be made to this image. MadMax 19:18, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead

Go ahead, the image is no longer needed. However, after leavign the message on my talk page ic ant get rid of this "YOU HAVE NEW MESSAGES (LAST CHANGE)" banner from the top of my screen - ive tried everything. Any advice/help? - Doobuzz 20:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:RQ-9 Predator.jpg

I have removed your request for this image to be deleted as a copyright violation. It was properly tagged as being in the public domain, but the uploader gave the incorrect website of origin. The image was taken by Dick Jones while working for Sandia National Laboratories, a US Government entity under the United States Department of Energy and can be found on the NASA website here. Thanks, and happy editing! AuburnPilot^talk 20:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Please Delete My Image

Hi, Mecu,

I am trying to delete an image I uploaded on WikiCommons (mainly because I forgot to rotate it first), but am sort of a Wikipedia novice. The image can be found at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Viasacra.jpg

I saw your name on the Images and media for deletion page and was wondering if you could help me out.

Thanks, --MosheA 18:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Redoaknew.jpg

It is not a copyvio because it is made by the US government and is therefore in the public domain, please review futher and contact me on my talk page if the above is not the case. Thank you, Cbrown1023 20:25, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Then make it explicitly clear on the page so another user does not make the same mistake I did. Cbrown1023 20:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Mythical national championship

I saw your post on the talk page for this article. I respect Wikipedia's policy but it is very hard to follow this policy when another user is allowed to comment without regard to this policy. I hope you will understand my sentiment and address this issue. 66.188.79.89 20:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I understand this, but I feel I am at least entitled to protection based on this policy. If I choose to continue using Wikipedia I will respect this policy, but it is only fair that I am not the only one required to follow it. 66.188.79.89 21:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

re Richtransvilg.jpg

i dont know the right tag, but im certain fair use applies. its a government agency not a private company, if we can use the coca cola logo we can use an image from city redevelopment plans owed by them for purposes of education not profit especially since there is no alternative available, and cmon Richmond is not gonna sue us for promoting their city.qrc2006/email 01:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

i doubt its copyrighted, i dont know how to write a rationale, allthough i believe i allready did, i dont know how to fix it, i added the closest approximate tag on the list, what tag should i add, theres no general fair use one dude. lil help?qrc2006/email 02:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Beatrix, Cartin, and Pembroke

Have the request to delete those PNG(s) carried out. They serve no use. Though one could be however used to show EVE Online I'll put one of them there to show the character creation and you have the rest deleted. Not sure which will use yet, probably Cartin.PNG. --William Pembroke^(talk) 15:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Comments in the Chris Leak Page

Excuse me, you are not allowed to delete somebody's comments in the discussion page. Users are entitled to thier opinions, and you need to respect that. Thanks. Dcmcgov 05:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Image "Image:RA Montgomery CVL 22.jpg"

Hi, you have mentioned: "Image:RA Montgomery CVL 22.jpg, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.cvl-22.com/pics3.html. As a copyright violation, Image:RA Montgomery CVL 22.jpg appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria."

Please note, pictures taken aboard US Navy aircraft carriers during combat operations in WWII have the licensing "PD-USGov-Military-Navy" with the following description:

"This image is a work of a sailor or employee of the U.S. Navy, taken or made during the course of the person's official duties. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the image is in the public domain"

So your deletion was not correct, or has something changed with the label "PD-USGov-Military-Navy"?

Please explain me the copyright violation of this "PD-USGov-Military-Navy"-picture:

http://www.cvl-22.com/56.jpg

Andy Felix c 22:30, 7 January 2007

Hi Mecu, thanks for your explanation. I have removed the deleted picture from "Alex Vraciu".

Anyway i'm not completely sure, if the pic really had to be deleted, you have mentioned:

"Unfortunately you took the image from a site which states "All pictures used on this site are the copyrighted works of Wyatt Wolfe Unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. 2005". As such, it's hard to believe that the image was the product of the US Federal Government. The deleting admin agreed with me and deleted the image."

Wyatt Wolfe is mentioning on his website:

"This site is owned and maintained by Wyatt Wolfe in honor to his father, Glenn E Wolfe Sr, who served on board the USS Independence CVL-22 during World War II. Credit is given to the respective owners of all photographs. The picture works are copyright Wyatt Wolfe 2005"

http://www.cvl-22.com/index.html

The label "PD-USGov-Military-Navy" states: "This image is a work of a sailor or employee of the U.S. Navy, taken or made during the course of the person's official duties."

If Glenn E Wolfe Sr "served on board the USS Independence", didn't he made the images "during his official duties"?

So how can his son Wyatt Wolfe mention "use is strictly prohibited"?

And why does Wyatt Wolfe mention "Credit is given to the respective owners of all photographs"?

Felix c 19:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Richard Jeppson.gif

Regarding the copyright tag on the photo, I am 100% sure it is a military photo. This has been discussed in the past (if you would look at the history this happened before as well). I personally feel some people are overzelous in terms of removing picture (including this one).

The subject of this article is my grandfather, who served in the Army Air Corp during WWII. I have no doubt that this is a military issued photo, especially given the fact that he is standing in front of the plan that dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima Japan in 1945.

My problem is, now this picutre will be deleted within a day or two with absolutely no discussion. This is one of the reasons I'm not contributing to Wikipedia any longers. I am removing the tag, upon leaving this explaination as I feel it explains the situation adequately. Davidpdx 09:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The conversation was probably on my talk page as well as someone elses. My guess is this is going to get deleted before I get an answer. Anytime I've tried to get an answer about a picture I get nothing in terms of a response. I found the same picture on a military webpage and have emailed someone to see if they can track down the sourcing.

Yes, I probably am very bias. As for my grandfather, contacting him is not something that's as easy as making a phone call. He is traveling for about another week. The other problem is I, myself am not inside the US at this point in time, but working in Korea.

One other option (at least for the time being) would be to use this photo Image:Jeppson Tibbets Van Kirk.jpg. Although it also has Tibbets and Van Kirk in the picture as well, I guess it would work. What do you think? Davidpdx 01:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll do that. I don't think I'm going to crop the picture. It's a good idea, but I might as well leave them in the picture. He knows both of the men pretty well and has maintained a friendship with them over the years (this is personal knowledge, not something I would add to the article). It would seem a shame to take them out of such a nice picture.

Hopefully the person I emailed (It looked like an Air Force email address) will contact me and give me at least a clue where to start. I think the military is going to have to give permission for its use more then likely. I'll add a note to the talk page of the article outlining what I'm doing and that this picture is a replacement for the other one and that once I get permission I can add the one of him in front of the plane back (maybe I'll still leave this one if it seems relevent). Thanks for your help. Davidpdx 01:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use Rationale template?

Mecu, is there a template that requests the addition of Fair use rationale to a FU image uploaded before the May 2006 date? I know to use {{Frn}} for FU images uploaded after May 2006, but I'm looking for something to add to images uploaded before that date.--NMajdan•talk 15:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Up for IFD? Surely not. The image I'm wanting FUC is a university logo that has the correct FU template but not rationale. Surely I shouldn't put it up for deletion.--NMajdan•talk 15:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

That script, should it fill in everything when it opens up the tabs? On my computer, it opens the various pages in new tabs but doesnt fill them out and doesn't submit. I'll keep looking into it.--NMajdan•talk 21:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Odd. I'm using Firefox 2 as well and I also already had those req'd scripts. Still nothing.--NMajdan•talk 21:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Should be there. At the very top.--NMajdan•talk 22:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing you found it on my monobook.js file. That "improved" one you linked me to is the one I originally had in my .js file but I switched to the other one when I saw it was what you had. So, I've tried both.--NMajdan•talk 22:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I didn't forget that.--NMajdan•talk 22:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, that actually worked. Now to go back through my js file and figure out what's interfering. I've got a lot of stuff on mine I want to keep. Thanks for the help.--NMajdan•talk 22:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Will do. One of my favs is the personallinks one. You can add various pages to the 'navigation' box on the left side. Good stuff. Also, adding the UTC time to the top and when you click it, it purges the page.--NMajdan•talk 22:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, it was just the ordering. I had the required addons at the top and the imagedelete script at the bottom. I just moved the imagedelete script to the top right below to two addons and now it works.--NMajdan•talk 22:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow, this script is very useful. Makes it a lot easier.--NMajdan•talk 01:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello from Soso

Hi, since you are well aware of the wikipedia policies about the photographs, I would like to ask you how does the wikimedia commons work? For example, I have some nice pictures of Georgia, which is from my own camera and I also have some beautiful pictures by Paata, a Georgian photographer, who granted me the permission to use his pictures on wikipedia, but probably he wants some rights to be resitricted. Please drop me a line if you find time for it. Regards, SosoMK 16:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Saw II Picture

Yeah, go ahead, remove it. I'm not using it.--CyberGhostface 01:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

USGS

That program is a hog. It locked up my machine and forced a reboot. Wahkeenah 01:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

• All I did was click on the link, and my PC ground to a halt. I'm not touching that program again. Google Maps is efficient by comparison (and it ain't, in general). Wahkeenah 01:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern

That cat was db-authored by me due to WP:NAMCON (Category names of users or some such) issue back whenever. If you have the time to hunt them down and clear the links, feel free, as it's not a current page. I need to housekeep most all of those tagged pages now that I'm getting back up to speed (I've been away on RL matters) and will tend to it in due course. Thanks for your concern, but the redlink is not harmful, however untidy. // FrankB 02:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Question

On the 2007 BCS National Championship page, was I the "new user who probably doesn't know better," and if so, what didn't I know better about. I simply updated scores, nothing more, nothing less...Minkus2816 03:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Mea culpa. Minkus2816 03:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:An IDF M109 self-propelled howitzer fires into Southern Lebanon.png

I just renamed the image, please ask the original uploaded (User:Rangeley). --Cat out 11:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

How are you hunting for these images btw? --Cat [[User talk:Cool

Cat|out]] 11:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use on Alodia.jpg

Would it be alright to just delete the image in question? I don't want to have anything to do with that article anymore...for personal reasons. I'm sorry if I'm sounding a bit weird. ^^; Silentaria 00:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The Black Parade GA help

Thank you for providing some help on the talk page of The Black Parade article, however can you please help me out with something? I would like to help the part with POV in the Reception section, however, I'm not sure how I would approach this. Can you please tell me a direction I'd be able to take with this? Thank you!  Orfen ^{User Talk} | _Contribs 21:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Update on Morris Jeppson Image

I recieved a nice response from the Air Force, but I'm still not sure to go about doing this so this is done properly. I'm hoping to get it fixed so the picture won't be deleted. Anyway here is there response:

Thank you for your e-mail. All photographs located on the Agency homepage are considered to be in the public domain. You are welcome to use it, we just ask that you give the Agency credit for the photograph.

MRS LYNN GAMMA HQ AFHRA/RSA

The website was: http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/photo_galleries/509_composite_group_history/Captions/039_Lt_Jeppson.htm

Can you give me some help in terms of what I should do? Thanks! Davidpdx 00:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks..I really didn't understand how to do all that, but I think I have a better idea now. I uploaded the other (slightly larger) image you recommended as a new file (had a hard time because the file extension was diffrent. I'll just let the old one get deleted. Can you take a look at the image licensing and see if I did it correctly? Image:Morris Jeppson.jpg Thanks.. Davidpdx 04:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Helmet in infoboxes

I appreciate your help with all of the image procedures. This kind of stuff is new to me, so your responses were definitely informative. It may take me awhile to get this all squared away, so I may enlist the help of others on this. Don't worry about your earlier response; you seem like someone who is very knowledgeable, that's why I went to you with this question. By the way, how do we edit the infobox to include both the logo and helmet? I have no clue. Thanks again.Football79 00:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Nomanation for Deletion of Image:Donald North Court (CY).jpg

I was wonder why you nomanated this photo for deletion. The photo was done by me, non-objectable, and was for the Camp Yawgoog article. KB1KOI 22:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:RayDavis.jpg

Hi! You have removed the copyright tag on the Ray Davis photo, saying that it is not a work of the US Federal Gov. Why do you think so? It is a White House photo. Indeed, they do not give the name of the photographer (prresumably, they do not know it), so it is not clear. However, for the 2004 ceremony, they mention that the photos were made by Eric Draper, which is the White House Photo Director. PS. You can answer here, I'm watching the page AdamSmithee 07:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

If you look at this image which states their affiliation is not with the White House, then it can't be a federal government photo. I didn't see anything else on the website talking about their copyright status. Could you show me where you say they said the photos were taken by Eric Draper? Thank you. --MECU≈talk 13:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It is not a fed gov agency, but the photos were taken in the White House and, at least in 2004, by the White House photographer, which is fed. gov. employee - so they should be public domain. Although they don't detail on who was the photographer for Ray Davis (which is not part of the 2004 photos), I think it is resonable to assume that they didn't bring their own photographer on that occasion. So it should also be public domain. AdamSmithee 10:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Any thought? AdamSmithee 08:01, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, your comments got lost in the confusion on the rest of my talk page. Unless we have proof it was by the WH photographer, there are too many other possibilities for the copyright of this image. The location is obvious, but irrelevant. An AP photographer could have taken the image, or another press agency. Any why wouldn't they bring along their own photographer? Unless the copyright stats can be confirmed, we can't have a copyright status. You should e-mail this organization and ask them if they are willing to release the image freely. This page will be of assistance in that effort: Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Sorry for the delay again. --MECU≈talk 13:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Template |

Mecu, I took a look at your template under development and I made some changes and I think it is looking much better. It took many tests so I have quite a few edits in the history. The only thing I could not resolve was the last example where there is no score. The italic/bold tags (''') are getting messed up for some reason so the record is in italics with an apostrophe before the record and an apostrophe is showing in the score field. Don't know why this is yet. Have a look and let me know what you think.--NMajdan•talk 21:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:My Sandbox

Thanks for removing those fair use images. I completely forgot to do that when I copied the article to work on.--Isotope23 23:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the concern

I'm doing well, I've been able to jump into translations and linguistic related stuff. Thanks again. --Sergiusz Szczebrzeszyński ^{|talk to me||what i've done||e|} 23:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Anton Balasingham.jpg

I have added the source: www.tamilnet.com for the above image.

But still I am not sure whether I have done it properly. Could you help me on this matter.Thanks.Rajsingam 15:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. But the www.tamilnet.com has some internal problem. I couldn't open it. Can't you extend the time until the Tamilnet could be accessible.Rajsingam 15:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. But I hope I will provide the HTML tag at the earliest possible. By the by I went through your user profile, there you have mentioned about your distant German ancestry. I am going to publish a book on "German Memories in Asia". You can get more information about me and the book at Rajkumar Kanagasingam.Rajsingam 15:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Amiri Baraka.jpg

Please explain how this image is a copyright violation of the Creative Commons license. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 18:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Putting a CC-NC-ND image on Wikipedia is by no means a copyright violation, because neither commercial gain nor creation of derivative works has happened. It is merely against Wikipedia policy. {{Imagevio}} is simply the incorrect template to use. {{PUInonfree}} is. Go and read Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 19:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Adoption Offer

Hello!

Thanks for your response. Somehow, I get the idea that you like football.  :)

So do I. I'll be happy to accept your offer of adoption. Where do we start?

--LtlKty 05:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:ADOPT

Hi there,

As a current Adopter with the Adopt-a-User program there has been some ongoing developments that we would like to bring to your attention.

A new Adopter's Area has been created where you can find useful resources and other Adopter's experiences. Please feel free to add any resources you may have found useful as an Adopter, as well as recount any experiences that you think may help others. If you know of any useful resources for new users / Adoptees then you can add them here.

Also the way the adoption process works has changed slightly. To decrease workload at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user, on offering adoption please change the {{Adoptme}} template to {{Adoptoffer}} on the user's user page, and this will add the user to Category:Wikipedians having been offered adoption. Users that have already been offered adoption can always have a second or third offer, but by separating out those users that have not had an adoption offer yet, it is hoped that no one will go lacking.

Furthermore numerous Adopters have been adding their details to a list of users available for adopting, to offer a more personalised service and allow new users to browse through and pick their own Adopter. The quickest way to adopt though, is still to contact users at the Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user.

Finally - thanks for all your hard work, keep it up - and if you have any general questions or suggestions about the further development of Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User please bring them to our talk page. Cheers Lethaniol 13:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Your bot seems to have a glitch

Photos

• Image:Schadler robert.jpg
• Image:Evans allen.jpg
• Image:Rowan ruth.jpg
• Image:Hunter jon blair.jpg
• Image:Sypolt dave.jpg

Were all labled by your bot as unsourced yet, each photo was labled as to its source with the text; Official Press Release Photo from WV Legislature. Press Release photos are public domain and for General Public Use. They were labled with the GFDL which should be correct. Sourced and labled, what more it your bot looking for? --71Demon 16:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

These are sourced the same

* Image:Betty Ireland, West Virginia Secretary of State.jpg

* Image:Gov Joe Manchin.jpg

Labled as the press release photos. What are you looking for? --71Demon 16:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Further, see User_talk:Pd_THOR#Your_Bot_has_a_glitch_also. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 17:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fair Use Images on Wikipedia

I'm sorry. I understand now. No need to be so harsh, if you were. Marcus2 19:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, William E. Davis, was selected for DYK!

On January 14, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article William E. Davis, 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.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 19:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hey. I strongly suggest you read WP:MUSIC and especially WP:CSD before embarking on another CSD tagging mission. You have requested speedy deletion to not only to bands that assert notability, but also meet several of the criteria on WP:MUSIC. Thanks, Prolog 19:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

CSD#A7 is not valid, if there is any kind of real assertion of notability (record label, notable band members, tour information). I don't know how many of the ones you tagged meet WP:MUSIC (I assume almost all), but none of them can be speedily deleted. Also, lack of references does not qualify an article for speedy deletion. I have no idea which administrator asked you to do such mass-tagging, but the admin in question does not seem to understand WP:CSD. Thanks, Prolog 20:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Kaiser High School logo image

I see you tagged the image for deletion. I believe it has been tagged correctly now. It is a logo of secondary school and is used under fair use. You can remove your deletion tag, now. Thanks! In the future, it might help new users if you suggested where they might find more information rather than just telling them they are wrong.Gurp13|[[User talk:Gurp13|Talk]] 21:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I'm not upset, perhaps I was frustrated. But, when someone twice tells you, "No, you're wrong." then I think they should also maybe offer a suggestion as to how they might find the information or at least a general area to look in. I know it's my responsibility as the uploader to provide the information, but I guess I think that if you're going to be an editor, you might offer some assistance, too. Clearly you had an opinion that the logo I was not properly tagged. My guess is that you could have very easily suggested I look at "logos" as a category. If I had not found it and the logo got deleted would that have been a good outcome? I'm not asking you to tag it for me, but a word in the right direction would have been nice. Especially after you told me twice I was wrong.Gurp13|[[User talk:Gurp13|Talk]] 22:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Response to adoption questions

It took me a while to answer because I wanted to give it some thought. You asked really good questions because they caused me to stop and reflect on exactly why I joined. I want my association with Wikipedia to be a long one so I would like to be careful and considerate about how I grow into the community. I've been exploring and found that there is lot to do as a member, just about all of which isn't obvious to the unregistered user. Quite honestly, I'm a bit (understatement) overwhelmed by the scope of the work that needs to be done. I can see that the scope will easily grow as Wikipedia continues to develop. So, to answer your questions:

What I want to get out of adoption? I'd like to learn how to participate well in the community - how to contribute in such a way that reduces the overall scope of work and increases the value of Wikipedia.

What I want to accomplish here at Wikipedia? I would like to eventually become a researcher and help with editing and refining the more challenging problem articles. Maybe I will even introduce a few. Practically though, I should start with something like correcting punctuation, grammar, spelling, links, etc. Can you recommend a good place to look to find simple edits of that type?

What I like to do here on Wikipedia? Read!! The articles I have been interested in are well written and linked. I hadn't yet come across many that require help.

What are my problems at Wikipedia? I haven't yet encountered any.

The first thing I've done is correct the problem I created on your page. It is now just a title. Is there a way to link to a specific page section (similar to # in HTML A tabs)?

Thanks again for working with me. I'll be sure to ask for help and also for review of edits that I do. I'll be sure to change them first in my sandbox. LtlKty 21:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC) ^talk

Reference to Buffalo Soldier photograph

In reference to the Buffalo Soldier photograph http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Saddle_and_accessories.JPG you can find the source: http://www.sas.upenn.edu/African_Studies/Smithsonian_GIFS/BUFLO1_19209.gif I've already added the source in the image.
--Signaleer 06:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Nomination of Image:Rebecca Twigley - Brownlow.jpg for deletion

You tagged w:Image:Rebecca Twigley - Brownlow.jpg for deletion, claiming that it was as replaceable fair use image. The image already had a detailed fair use rationale, which explained why the image is irreplaceable with a free use image. Could you please explain on the talk page why you believe the existing rationale is invalid? Tntnnbltn 08:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I knew the image was likely to be questioned, which is why I made sure the fair use rationale was up to scratch. I don't know if it'd be possible to get a photo of the dress; a newspaper article I read said they were thinking of featuring it on a public display, but I don't know if this actually went ahead or not. I'll look into it. --Tntnnbltn 14:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

"Hello"

Dear Mecu,

"Hello!"

This "hello" was brought to you by,

Users: Psdubow and Cocoaguy

This is a copyrighted "hello" and can not be used by others or redistributed without the express-written consent of both of these users.

If you have any questions or comments about this "hello", please feel free to post a message on Psdubow's and/or Cocoaguy's talk page.

Editor Review

Good morning (GMT); I notice that you have no reviews at your editor review, and I plan to review you soon. If you do want a review from me, give me a nudge at my talk page in a few hours and I'll get back to you as soon as possible.

Cheers and regards,
Anthonycfc (talk • email • tools) 11:19, Thursday December 28 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Singil Station

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Singil Station was closed as keep, but I personally agree with merging/redirecting them. How about starting a new guideline on such things similar to WP:LOCAL? —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-31 06:34Z

Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks

Hey, thanks for stopping by Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. It looks like you're a little confused about the template syntax. The sample parameter should only be the URL of a page using Wikipedia content. You don't need to paste in the actual content. The URL parameter in turn should be only the main URL of the mirror. See Template:Wikipedia mirror for more info. Thanks again. Superm401 - Talk 10:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

TicketCity is clearly still using Wikipedia content. For example, the "COLORADO AVALANCHE TEAM HISTORY:" section of http://www.ticketcity.com/Sports-Tickets/Hockey-Tickets/NHL-Tickets/NHL-Western-Conference-Tickets/NHL-Northwest-Division-Tickets/Colorado-Avalanche-Tickets.html is from Colorado_Avalanche#Franchise_history. You cited this page yourself originally. Superm401 - Talk 05:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Image help

Hey, Mecu. I need to replace the fair-use image on Adrian L. Peterson and I found one on flickr, but after reading the image copyright section, I'm not sure it would be considered "Free." Can you please check it out and let me know if its usable? The image is at [3]. Thanks. z4ns4tsu\^talk 20:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

It looks like NMajdan already found one and I just hadn't seen it yet. Thanks for your help. z4ns4tsu\^talk 20:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, well it looks like the one I uploaded may have to be deleted. The photographer changed the license on my after I notified him that I used it on Wikipedia. He even said it was ok to use but he still changed the license. I notified him of the issue, so we'll see if it stays. I may notify the photographer of that picture cause it is really good.--NMajdan•talk 21:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

That's the thing, how do I prove that the image was a CC license when I uploaded it if he has changed it? You can see the photo here and where I said I used the same license he used and then he said "it will be fine." Then he changed it.--NMajdan•talk 22:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Aha! He changed it back. Now how to I go about getting it "verified" in case he changes it again?--NMajdan•talk 22:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

So, get this, the guy changed his license on flickr! I uploaded several good images on Commons of Peterson, Kevin R. Wilson, Bob Stoops, and some others. Check out the commons:University of Oklahoma#People in athletics for the image. Also, there is commons:Image:Tyrone Willingham.jpg.↔NMajdan•talk 04:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Safe_conduct.jpg

"Thanks for uploading Image:Safe_conduct.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then you need to specify who owns the copyright, please." Is this text and licensing - Original scan of military leaflet

insufficient for you? Or do you mean the jpeg file? I imported and scanned the original. And I came by the original the hard way, I carried a bag of those all through Vietnam while in the employ of the United States Government.

Luxomni 17:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

RfA

H. I was wondering if you had given any thought to becoming an admin. You certainly seemed qualified having seen you around. If yu're interested, let me know and I can create the RfA nomination.--Wizardman 23:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I had sent something to Wizardman, so his talk was on my watchlist. When I saw your thing about running for RFA, I was startles the you weren't an admin already! Just a little advice, though they may make an exception for someone with your contributions, many people oppose or go neutral for not a long time on the project (about < 1 year). --TeckWiz^Talk Contribs_@ 00:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyright notice

User talk: FactChkr has removed the Image copyright notice you had left himremoved Image copyright notice you had placed on his/her page and has been reverted.Just thought you would like to know.--  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Your deletions in Minneapolis, Minnesota

Mecu, I have addressed your edits to Minneapolis, Minnesota in the Village Pump (assistance). Sorry I am not able to discuss your edits in multiple places. -Susanlesch 18:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Mecu/br.js

Thanks for the railway station edit. I tried to install your BR tool; pasted the code into my monobook.js, bypassed the cache ... bounced the browser ... cannot see the BR link near watch. Any advice? thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

Nope, still nothing. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Yup, I'd sussed the need to edit ... still no joy. Happy to be your guinea-pig, equally happy if you want to drop the subject. I just thought I'd zap the BRs in the rest of the railway station articles. (Of course, you have that facility ;) --Tagishsimon (talk)

Bingo! And tested on UK railway stations - Y. Thanks. I'll get on & put it to use.

Good advice - will follow

Thanks for the advice. Guess you noticed the article I pasted in my sandbox. It also appears to need references to the Wiktionary. Somewhere, I saw an article about setting up accounts on all sister projects. I'll use that and get started...--LtlKty 00:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC) (talk)

Image:JesseVentura.jpg

When I uploaded this image, Jesse Ventura was Governor of Minnesota. The State website stated somewhere, that content is in the public domain. However, it would take too much time for me to try to find that statement again as the website is quite vast. In addition, I believe this image has been tweaked and modified many times since I uploaded it. So do what you want with this image. --Dennis Fernkes 01:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Image:Reservation_in_IIT.PNG

Hi, I have no objection to the deletion. — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 06:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:220px-IanStanley.jpg)

I did not upload this.

I worked on the code.

trezjr 00:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Brick_screenshot.png

Delete away. It was used in an article but it was replaced by a better one. I just forgot about it Oskar 01:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

re: Orphaned fair use image

Thank you for your message. I didn't realize this image was removed from the article (and no reason was given for its removal). That said, the replacement image seems okay, and this image is a gif file (which I now understand is forbidden) so I don't mind if it is deleted. Is there something I should do to delete it? Best regards. Jogurney 03:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

National Titles

MECU: Before taking this idea to the entire group at WP:CFB, I thought I'd run the idea by a couple of guys that seem to be level-headed, have experience in the Project and are telented designers. I have become convinced that we need a fully-integrated solution to infoboxes and football championship article. I think that if we can give some semblance of order to the football championship article, then the infobox problem will solve itself. My idea is to redo the main year-by-year table to fully report all claims to the National Title in each year, but designate the "Wire Champ" and the "Consensus Champ" each year. Then the infoboxes would reference "Wire Champs" and "Consensus Champs" and tie back to the year-by-year table. Take a look at National Champ project and you will see a few sample years that illustrate how this would work. The sources for the poll information will be the NCAA and College Football Data Warehouse. Let me know what you think about the idea and, if you like it, how it can be improved. Also, you are more than welcome to fool around with my test table. Thanks--Tlmclain | Talk 03:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't very clear. First, I am not trying to be exclusionary in the least I just (a) need help with getting the table or template right and (b) was asking for an initial impression of the concept. In other words, if your reaction to the concept was that it was sheer idiocy, then I would not want either of us to waste time on this (I also recognize that even if you think that the concept has merit, the Project may well still reject it when it is presented). In short, I think it still needs work and refinement before it is presented. Without wishing to exclude anybody, I was trying to quickly explain the concept/vision so you could better help with (a) and (b).

As to the concept itself, my cryptic reference was to the on-going debate that started with what National Title information should be included in the team infobox and then seemed to expand to the football championship article. In watching and participating in the debate, I have come to several conclusions. #1 Edit wars related to the National Title entry in the team infoboxes and related to counting “recognized” titles (see, this example) seem to center on the same problem of definition. #2 There are a number of different ways to count national titles being employed across college football pages, including Wire Titles in the team infoboxes, some kind of blended approach in the By Year table in the football championship article and the National Championship Foundation selection in the Most national championships section of the football championship article. #3 There is currently no one source on Expedia which lists all teams selected by all polls in all years. #4 A table that sets forth all teams selected by all polls in all years AND makes an effort to logically identify wire and consensus titles AND is then used to populate team infoboxes could solve a lot of problems.

With all this in mind, I set about to try to create a sample of the master table that I have in mind with my National Champ project. Although it currently only includes three sample years, I believe that it demonstrates many of the possible yearly results. My vision for the master table would be to list every team that received a #1 vote from the polls recognized by the NCAA and CFDW in every year from 1869 until now. In each year, the table would designate which teams won the Wire Title and which teams won the “consensus” title (currently proposed as teams with 25% or more of the polls in a given year, but easily changed once we get input from the Project). This master table would replace the By Year table in the football championship article and be used to create the other tables in the article like the one in the Most national championships section. The next step would be to modify the team infoboxes to either have two lines – Wire Titles & Consensus Titles or one line with Wire & Consensus Titles with links back to the master table. If folks wanted to, we could even include “claimed” Titles.

Hopefully, you now have a clearer understanding of my “vision.” Any help, guidance or counsel that you can provide would be most appreciated.--Tlmclain | Talk 05:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. First - a confession - I don't know how to make the orange and yellow look like the Coach year-by-year. I tried copying the code but must have been doing something wrong. Would you please fix it? Your suggestion about providing percentages is a good one - I had already been toying with something like that, but your idea is better. I hear your concerns about the 25% rule and believe that I have some answers to that question, but will save that entire discussion for the Project (by the way, CFDW uses the 25% rule and I don't think they ever have more than 2 "consensus" titles). Finally, from your observation of edit wars, if you know of any years that seem to be particularly contested, I'd like to put them in the sample table so that people can see what the outcome would be.--Tlmclain | Talk 14:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. A template would make sense going forward if all years are going to be included in the table, however, while I am still working the kinks out, I'd like to leave it as a table since its easier for me to change a table.--Tlmclain | Talk 15:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

MECU: I just went live with the presentation of this idea on WP:CFB at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#National Titles. Your input would be appreciated.--Tlmclain | Talk 22:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Image:Cap1.jpg

Hello! I had originally written to the film's director about using the screen cap and was given permission to display it, but it doesn't seem to be relevant to the page anymore. Is there a way for me to remove it, or should I just leave it until the 26th? (Sorry, still a newbie with the whole image thing!) Thanks. Romdoll 05:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

orphaned image

Hi there. I saw your message on my talk page regarding Image:NXLogo.jpg. Yeah, it's an orphan. However, it's an orphan because pilotguy screwed up. Please wait until the... discussion is played out. Thanks. ... aa:talk 07:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Image-Michigan labor day 055.jpg

I removed your speedy from Image:Image-Michigan labor day 055.jpg. Take a look at it and Image:Michigan labor day 055.jpg side by side. You're going to be rolling your eyes and banging your head on your desk, but they are ever so slightly different. ;) --BigDT 23:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

civility, csd, ifd, etc.

Hi, Mecu. I don't have any special beef with you. If you care to, you might consider going through the archives for my talk page. In the past, I complained that users were using automated tools to go and delete images that fit... some criterion of theirs. When I bitched and moaned loudly, they all responded, "oh well, heavens, the backlog is just so hyooooge that we can't possibly evaluate each and every one of them..." I assume that is the case here. Granted, I understand your point of view. Consider my perspective on this: if I were to go about deleting orphaned images, I'd spend the five or ten seconds per image to find out why an image is orphaned. In the case of a user who has been here for some years, having had many thousands of edits, I'd be inclined to ask the user, unless said image was of a large meteor hanging above mine head. But that's just my two cents. My response to the Pilot Person was based upon his negligent use of administrative tools, justified by his lack of time. One does not do a piss-poor job of mopping the floor because they are short of time. Rather, if they do a piss-poor job of mopping they floor, they are fired (mopping being a "nothing special" kind of job, there are metric zillions of people capable of mopping who will do a conscientious job of it; you fire one, there are (a metric zillion)-1 people left to do it). I am especially irritated with Mr. Guy and the other admin I've been involved with recently because they both have the same excuse for the same behavior: laziness justifying laziness (or perspective, you choose which is more sinister). Regardless, no offense taken or intended. I understand where you're coming from, and I very much appreciate your replying and letting me know your thoughts on the subject. Thanks again. ... aa:talk 00:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

To be honest

I thought those images had been deleted ages ago. They can be deleted immediately. Humorbot5 00:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Orphaned fair use image (Image:MPOGD.jpg)

It no longer matters. What I had originally uploaded that for has long since been deleted. Months ago. HalfShadow 04:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Orphaned fair use image (Image:Mw1-battle.jpg)

Hi, I've noticed that you have decided to tag the above image for deletion. Can you please refer to my talk page to discuss the issues. Much thx. --Blackhawk charlie2003 05:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:TheseAreMySongs.JPG

Hello! I have no idea why you're objecting to this image. It clearly is designated as an album cover (twice, in fact, for some reason), so what's the problem? Thanks. SFTVLGUY2 16:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I downloaded this image only once, but it appears there is a duplicate of it. See [4] . . . thanks. SFTVLGUY2 16:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

It APPEARS I downloaded this image twice, four minutes apart, but in fact I didn't. I wouldn't have any reason to do so. Furthermore, Wiki decides if a photo should be designated .jpg or .JPG, not the editor uploading it. Since the name is exactly the same, wouldn't have Wiki warned me an image with that name already exists? I'm confused by this . . . can you please explain how it could happen? Thanks! SFTVLGUY2 16:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to explain, perhaps not too clearly. When I upload an image, Wikipedia appends the .jpg or .JPG, not I. I simply enter the photo, all of which are labeled .jpg, from my file and Wiki does the rest. Sometimes it retains the .jpg, sometimes it capitalizes it. I understand Wiki thinks there are two different images because one is .jpg and the other is .JPG - what I DON'T understand is why there's a second image. You said this happens often . . . I'm trying to understand why it does. Thanks. SFTVLGUY2 16:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

DarknessLord2

Okay, I forgive you for the template. However, I would like to know why the userpages I listed (except Jimbo and the WP:'s) aren't up on MfD too if my pages are up there. -- ~D-Lord (Sign!) (TCE) 01:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Image:Borowski_indians_2006.jpg

I'm sorry, I might misunderstand the first criterion, but it is next to impossible that I'll be able to meet with and take a picture of this ballplayer. MLB.com is my only resource for player images. Bookworm1 01:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

My Image

Okay. I will just upload from the commons instead. That would be easier. --Shaericell (Userpage|Talk|E-mail|Triplets) 01:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I knew that! I was just going to upload it to the commons. But now I know the license. --Shaericell (Userpage|Talk|E-mail|Triplets) 21:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

PJSta 1, 2, & 3.jpegs

Sorry, I forgot to add the copyright tags. I took all three of them years ago. DanTD 03:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Image Warning

I kind of forget to add the copyright status at the upload menu and I was adding the template and rationable when you were writing the unsourced template and a Edit conflict happened, but I already added them, Cheers! --Dark Dragon Flame 04:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Image: Carleth_and_Steven_Keys.jpg

You tagged one of my images as possibly unfree, but I took the photo myself. Please see my response to your statement on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If you have any more questions, please ask. If you don't, please remove the tag on the image. Thanks.
Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 04:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• I have responded again. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 04:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• I have responded again. The issue is now resolved, so please remove the tag from my image. Thanks!
  Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 16:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• No problem; you're just doing your job. After all, calmness is the Wikipedia way :-)
  Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 16:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fritzbot

Sure, just give me your e-mail address (or send me an E-Mail via "E-Mail this user") and I'll send you the settings file. --Fritz S. (Talk) 12:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

User:ryanpostlethwaite/0017

Please could you enlighten me as to why you put this up for MfD? If had bothered to contact me 1st, I would have been able to enlighten you. The article 0017 was previously speedily deleted as in my opinion it failed WP:WEB, however, not to put off new editors, I have offered to attempt to make the page follow all policies so it can be moved into mainspace, the page you have nominated is the guys first edit to the page (I told him to create it in my userspace so it wouldn't get deleted). I was then planning to work with him here to get it up to scratch, and if not, I would have had it speedied. This occured yesterday - not really giving me much chance to help the guy out. Maybe you could consider discussing with editors, their userspace, rather than putting it up for deletion RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 18:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Many appologies about my previous comment, I was just a bit annoyed, but we've obviously had our wires crossed. Do I think the aricle has a chance? No, not really to be honest and I've said this to the original author, but he is insistant that we at least try. My main plan was to do the best job we could with it and try and show the editor (User:Jerry571) why it fails, and how wikipedia works and why it probably isn't an acceptable article, if he agrees with me then I would have it speedied, but if he doesn't I would put the new page for deletion review, and let the commuity decide (as I've previously stated, I'm fairly sure it will fail, but its only fair on the editor). I've already directed him to WP:WEB and WP:RS in a bid to show why he fails, but he really does want to give it a go. Anyway, its upto you, but if you do remove the MfD, I will have it sorted within a week anyway (and in my opinion deletion review or consented speedy by the author is a much better road to down) RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 18:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Ryanpostlethwaite/0017

I've now requested this article be speedy deleted after I found this posted on their youtube page, slating wikipedia for originally deleting it in the 1st place, and requesting other people add it to wikipedia and basically say what they want to say. They're not getting any help from me if thats their attitudes! RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

James Blake Pic

Hey, thanks for allowing time to put the use of the image up for discussion, rather than deleting it. Since you're the second person to tag it, I have little doubt that it's "not fair use"; however, I would like to know why. It appears to be released under CC2.0, instead of CC2.5, honest mistake, sorry about that :). Do images have to be released under GFDL or the new version of CC to be deemed "okay"? The "meat" of CC2.0 and CC2.5 appear to be the same, so I really do not understand why the image in question is not fair use. As I'm sure you know, the pages upon pages of what is fair use, what isn't, what are good image sources, etc get rather dense. If you could help explain why things are and aren't fair use, it would be greatly appreciated. My mention on the talk page is here: Image talk:JamesBlake.JPG. Warm Regards Captain Courageous 01:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

He answered everything well. Thanks again for your help and concern :) AS you're well aware, it's easy to get confused on the image licensing when one starts out. Thanks again for the followup. Regards Captain Courageous 03:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

PD-Layout

Hi - I noticed you're adding "PD-Layout" to some images you upload to commons. PD-Layout appears to just be a bit of formatting code meant to be included in PD license templates - it's not a license tag itself. By including it, you're adding extra, junk text to the Licensing sections - see for example commons:Image:Sa1 on pad.jpg. PD-USGov is all you need to put on these images. --Davepape 15:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I see - I didn't realize it was from an automated tool. As you say, it's not a big concern. --Davepape 19:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

from Soso

Hi and thank you for the response. It helped me to get a better understanding. However, I did not quite get your message about the photograper's images. Georgian photographer, Paata, releases the images under {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}} and I thought that I could use those on wiki as well as on commons. For example, I am talking about those kind of pictures. [Image:SvetitskhoveliPaata3.jpg]. Right now, I am kind of busy in real life, but I'll sign up for commons and transfer the pictures as soon as I can. Please let me know If this is a wrong idea. In addition, I will forward the email from Paata if you want. What adressed do I forward it to? SosoMK 16:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Image from Blue Lagoon

Hey you recently told me an image of mine is being considered for deletion, what are the reasons? its been on here for a long time now and i took the photograph myself so i dont see the problem, please explain. (Neostinker 20:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC))

???? Actually , im quite confused, there are two pics, are you deleting the duplicate, the one on my page is differant, has no bag in it, well, if you could let me know but if that is the case it makes a lot more sense. (Neostinker 20:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC))

Image:Allison-brewer.jpg

You've posted a notice to my talk page concerning this image asking me to "specify the exact web page where you found the image", however this is not possible. The image was on a campaign website from 2005 and the site has since been taken offline. The image is one of the few items that remain on the site at allisonbrewer.ca, however any and all copyright information has been removed. - Jord 20:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I will include it... images and copyright are far from my area of expertise. - Jord 21:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Editor review archived

Thanks for having requested an editor review. A month has passed since it has been posted there, and it has been archived. You can find it at Wikipedia:Editor review/MECU/Archive/Archive-Jan2007, where you may read last minute additions. We would really appreciate your help in reviewing a random editor. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 22:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

BrandyN

Thx 4 information. Here the page: www.google.com/image I'm sorry, but I don't know which page is the exact page.

Montauk-airport.gif

I was surprised you tagged my Montauk-airport.gif file as unsourced as I originally stated that it was "by FAA." I have now included a URL for the image which is a federal government website. I know it's a thankless but necessary job to police these files. I hope the URL addresses the issue. Thanks. Americasroof 01:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

With regards to your follow up question. The FAA website is counterintuitive. You can't link directly to an image because it expires. You have to click on the instructions information in blue below the red lettered warning that tells you to link to that page ONLY. That takes you to a map and entry form. I clicked New York and then searched by city for Montauk. The image is a pdf with other data but I jus cropped the diagram. The link: http://www.naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/d_tpp The link to the Montauk diagram (for today only as it will expire) is http://www.naco.faa.gov/pdfs/ne_161_18JAN2007.pdf Hope this addresses this issue. Hope this addresses the issue. Americasroof 01:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Commons Image move helper

OK, CommonsHelper will no longer use "PD-Layout". --Magnus Manske 11:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

For your consideration. . .

I offer {{Replaceable short}}. For those template-cluttered talk pages (never for first warning, of course). If you like it, tell your friends. If not, tell me. Chick Bowen 03:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: multiple warnings--sometimes, but sometimes it just means a user was around in the old days when, let's face it, our image policies were less strict (it's people like that this template was intended for). I didn't realize about the script. I'll drop by Howcheng's talk page--if he's not interested, then so be it. Chick Bowen 03:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Kelly_gregg.JPG

I'm trying to determine how best to tag this image (and how to tag things with a copyright, in general). I have tried sorting through all the jargon and legalese, and my experience is minimal with copyright law. There isn't anything that I've seen with help in determining copyright or anything that I can reasonably understand that tells me how to apply a tag. Please help.

This is a photograph depicting DT Kelly Gregg of the Oklahoma Sooners at the OU-Texas game on October 11, 1997 at the Cotton Bowl in Dallas, TX. Kelly Gregg was a Junior at the time of the photograph.

I scanned this image from the 1998 Athlon Sports Big XII Edition. It was taken at the OU-Texas game on October 11, 1997 in Dallas, Texas by Layne Murdoch^[5], a freelance photographer based in Flower Mound, TX. I am currently in communication with Mr. Murdoch to determine the copyright on the photo and release information. I believe the photo should be considered under the 'low quality image' distribution clause. Please do not delete this photo until I can determine the copyright information. There are currently no collegiate photographs of Gregg that I could find on the internet.

Desert sapper 14:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)desert sapper

I have since added fair use rationale to the photo. Please let me know if this is sufficient or if I need to do something else with it.

Desert sapper 17:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)desert sapper

Image copyright problem with Image:Tigerliliysuite.gif=

MECU - You left me a request to update my copyright image for the image {{ITigerliliysuite.gif}} and I attempted to follow the tag requirements and add what was needed, however, I am not sure I did it correctly. Can you let me know when you return if I did it correctly, and also, if I did not, what else I need to add, or read to properly put the needed copyright information. It is liscenced by the artist's husband. I just could not figure out how to properly tag it. Thanks, ArchiemartinArchiemartin 20:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

About Anderson's Rule edits

Hi! Can you take a look and offer some pointers? I've also asked about on the dead-end article talk page. I think I've found my niche. Hope you had a great vacation. Thx! --LtlKty 23:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your critique. I only made technical (as differentiated from content) mods to the article. I agree with you that as written, it is rather difficult to follow. I want to do a little more research before I tackle the content. I'd also like to include a mention of research that shows that the rule is actually a "characteristic" of some semiconductors, but not a general rule. I'll make the technical changes you suggest, and be more careful about how often I save the page. This isn't a contest for me, so the edit count isn't important. --LtlKty^{talk | contribs} 04:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Go for it Mecu, You'd make a great admin RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:59, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks MECU - A few more questions RE: Image copyright problem with Image:Tigerliliysuite.gif

Thanks MEcu for helping me with this. I have a few more questions about copyright use. I believe I have input the correct fair use information now on tigerlilysuite.gif as well as updating it again on the main page. Could you check it for me and let me know if I followed the corrrrect wikipedia direction? Since you mentioned that I can restore it - I went ahead and tried to do so. To answer your question - her husband photographs all her works and it is in the public domain, so perhaps I just should have written public domain? I don't know. I am a arts professor so I am a little out of my element here.

Question 2 - I am working on another article about a woman Dorrie Nossiter who died in the 40's. Her grand nephew in UK is providing me with information on her and has images he is using for a book he is writing. How do I approach uploading her picture here? It is on his website and in the public domain as well. He has also given permission but I thought I would ask beforer I go ahead.

Thanks for help. ArchiemartinArchiemartin 23:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:Tigerliliysuite.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. MECU≈talk 03:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC) You've added a fair use license, so the image is now licensed. However, the use of an image under fair use requires a fair use rationale and information on why it's not replaceable. Also, the image must be used on Wikipedia, as fair use orphans can be deleted ("Use it or lose it") -- this is because orphanbot removed it from an article. You can restore it to that article. I've removed the no license tags and marked the other problem that now exist. Also, you said this is from the artist's spouse? Why can't the artist license the image themself? How are you related to them? Ideally, we want freely licensed images here at Wikipedia. If possible, the artist should be willing to license it under a free license. I use CC-BY-SA-2.5 myself, but there are many others, including the GFDL and just releasing into the public domain. Good luck! --MECU≈talk 18:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

hey mecu, i havent been around for awhile but i am getting back into the swing. i have seen user JT_Curtis leave his own quotes (which i have deleted) on various articles, and visited his own wiki 'page.' i believe that his page is a good candidate for deletion. i feel, although he may not, that he is non-notable. his page also leads to his 'band' page which is also non-notable, has no external citations and has links to purchase their music. both pages should be deleted, imo. how do i go about nominating these pages for deletion? i want to make sure i am doing this with correct etiquette. your own opinion on the pages would be great, as well. The undertow 01:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

College football

I just quickly cut and paste the references from Athletics at Rutgers University, without taking any time or care in editing—hence why the "name" parameter was in the <ref> tag. —ExplorerCDT 20:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)