User talk:ESkog/Archive14
Note of redirect[edit]
Hello! I created the article hydra in popular culture that you deleted only as a redirect to the article on hydras: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hydra_in_popular_culture&redirect=no I did NOT restore the deleted material; I only added the redirect formula. I hope that is okay. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 22:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the reply! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 22:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Image -- fair use question[edit]
I recently uploaded several images to add to an article I'm currently working on.
The images were either taken by myself or another producer for our online series and are all available on our official website. Should I just note edit and reupload the image with the proper information? This is what I was looking at putting in the description.
| Description |
Dave Reynolds as Breast Craven in Porntourage. |
|---|---|
| Source |
Taken by Kern Saxton and available on porntourage.net |
| Date |
"created 16. March. 2007" |
| Author |
Kern Saxton |
| Permission (Reusing this file) |
Free use.
|
Zsanford 00:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, when you tag images with tags that may lead to deletion, please do it right any notify the uploader of the image so that they may address the issue. Not doing so is wreckless and can cause perfectly usable (and oft necessary) images to be deleted simply because of a shift in wikipedia image policies. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 14:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Barbara Bouchet Photo[edit]
You seem to have deleted just about every photo I have ever uploaded.
I have found this photo on Flickr [1].
Are photos on Flickr considered Free ?
Under what category can I upload it ?
I want to get Barbara Bouchet up to GA status, so I need one photo at least.
Is this one acceptable ?
Tovojolo 18:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Barbara Bouchet Public[edit]
If you look at it [2] under additional information, to the right, it says PUBLIC meaning it can be used.
I want to make sure you see that so you don't delete this one as well.
I hope you're happy with it.
Tovojolo 18:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey ESkog. I just noticed that you deleted Image:Group-ednaswap.jpg. The rationale you gave in your deletion summary was "Image failing WP:NFCC and so tagged for at least 7 days", but I'm curious as to exactly what criteria the image failed. I would have brought this up earlier, preferably before the image was deleted in the first place, but I just noticed it was deleted, so my apologies for bringing up an old topic. Thanks for your time. Drewcifer3000 00:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Image:KS,MT,SD in Mudd's Women.jpg[edit]
You removed this image from Karen Steele and the reason you gave was :
"(this rationale cannot apply to living performers)"
Karen Steele died in 1988.
I have therefore put this photo back on Karen Steele.
Tovojolo 01:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:Lecktor02.jpg. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. CyberGhostface 18:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Non-free images[edit]
I saw Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Gentle_Reminder, am an admin, and would be interested in working on Category:Disputed_non-free_images_as_of_5_June_2007. I'm not sure what to do. For example, the tag on Image:McKesson logo.png states, This tag is meaningless without an accompanying fair use rationale. The deadline for adding the rationale was 2007-06-12 and no rationale was added. Do I just need to delete the image and summarize the delete as "failing WP:NFCC and so tagged for over 7 days" or is there more to it (e.g., notify the uploader that I deleted it)? Should I skip album covers? -- Jreferee (Talk) 07:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- What do you do in situations where an image such as Image:Udlogo.gif has an insufficient fair use rational? Remove the "concern|no fair use rationale given" template and post at IfD? -- Jreferee (Talk) 16:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- If you re-tag with a new {{dfu}} explaining the new problem (insufficient fair use), how do I notify the user or does BetacommandBot do that? Please look at Image:Readingrainbow logo.GIF to see if I am doing it correctly. -- Jreferee (Talk) 05:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I Notify the uploader and added the proper tag to the image caption. If there is something more I need to do for my new tag of Image:Readingrainbow logo.GIF, please let me know. Otherwise, thanks. -- Jreferee (Talk) 05:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
UMHS Photos are Fair Use[edit]
Dear ESkog, I did NOT re-upload any copyrighted images of UMHS. Rather, all the images I uploaded have been made available for public use by the University of Michigan Health System. They can be downloaded at http://www.med.umich.edu/news/iva.htm or http://www.med.umich.edu/prmc/services/favorites/buildings.html. If you do not believe me, you may contact the UMHS public relations team to verify that these images may be utilized at 734-764-2220. They have even offered to provide me with images that are not currently available. Thanks. I will reupload the images with your approval. I await hearing from you. Michiganmd 19:10, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply ESkog. I will await to hear from you on this. In the meantime, can I upload only those images found on the UMHS Image Archive (http://www.med.umich.edu/prmc/services/favorites/photos.html). Those images are made for public use and the site states: "the Image Archive is set up for you to easily download the images you need." Thanks very much. Michiganmd 19:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
OK then, I will wait to hear from you. Regards, Michiganmd 20:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi ESkog, I'm getting permission from UMHS to utilize their photos. I also have pictures that I have taken that I will post in the coming days. I will specify which pictures are theirs and which are mine. Thanks for all your help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Michiganmd (talk • contribs) 13:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Image: National Front[edit]
Hello! You deleted the Image:National Front.gif. This image of a poster, however, fell under the Category:Fair use political posters (see also Category:Political posters). Could you perhaps restaure it? Thanks, Tazmaniacs 15:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- I did not upload it myself, so I won't be able to do so. But I can provide you fair use rationales:
- It is a low resolution image, and thus not suitable for production of counterfeit goods.
- It is not replaceable with an uncopyrighted or freely copyrighted image of comparable educational value.
- The photo is only being used for informational purposes.
Cheers! Tazmaniacs 15:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick response & action! Cheers again! Tazmaniacs 15:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Bill Self[edit]
"This is getting old. Source the nonsense about the contraversies or go back to the fan pages. Nobody is taking about this in the mainstream." RE; I think you are wrong, but I will take that out since so many people are having an issue with it. I wish you guys would EDIT something instead of UNdoing the whole damn thing. THAT is getting old. You want sources, well between you and me, here are 5 different articles I found on one Google search about the distaste Illini fans have for Self. By the way, I am an Illinois State Redbird, so I dont go to the Illini fan pages. I have no desire to argue with you, but seemingly nobody appreciates my work here enough to amend thing where they feel disagreement, as I do for others. Thanks.
1. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20030423/ai_n12498372 2. http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2005/12/15/ 3. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/college/news/2003/04/15/illinois_self_ap/ 4. http://www.herald-review.com/blogs/marktupper/?p=214 5. http://www.herald-review.com/blogs/marktupper/?p=354 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.81.51.187 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well, 2, 4, and 5 are blogs and not really reliable sources. The other two reference that the coaching change happened and some recruits' decisions may have hung in the balance, but nothing about this imagined controversy that "continues to this day." (ESkog)(Talk) 22:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Stich3d[edit]
I am sorry, my mistake. This page has been reverted tens of times already... I wish he could stop. Mr. Neutron 18:01, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Also a suggestion: can you please make it a little more explicit that you are an admin on your front page? I think an inexperienced user might have some problems relating "deletions" and "blocks" to administrators at first sight. Mr. Neutron 18:06, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
The Apprentice (UK) images[edit]
I noticed you removed the images from the table, which was reverted by a vandal IP and then reverted back. I'm not so clued up on the old WP:FUC, so (without quoting WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS), could you explain why such content is allowed here, but not on the other table in question? I'm not questioning you/the policy, I'm just wondering. :D Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 23:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
PS, please could you also contribute to the article's FAC nomination, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
As you may already be aware, Category:Psuedoreligionist Wikipedians and its subcategories, Category:Discordian Wikipedians, Category:Flying Spaghetti Monsterist Wikipedians, Category:SubGenius Wikipedians, and others, have been deleted. That deletion is now up for review. If you have anything you'd like to say on the subject, now is the time. If you know of any other editors who might have something to say on the subject, pass the word. If, on the other hand, you are not interested in the slightest, feel free to delete this. — The Storm Surfer 01:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I just saw that you deleted the above image citing WP:NFCC. I'm guessing that someone had failed to provide a rationale. Was a source specified? If so, I may be able to write an acceptable rationale. — The Storm Surfer 01:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for looking into it for me. It's such a shame when people go to the trouble to upload images but don't provide the source, since it's not really correctable. — The Storm Surfer 03:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Smile[edit]
Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Re: Image[edit]
Done. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 20:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Request undelete of RulesToConsider[edit]
Hi. Earlier this week you deleted RulesToConsider. It's a historically signficant page, which contained early discussions of Wikipedia's policies. Wikipedia:Ignore all rules linked to this version of it. Instead of being a cross-namespace redirect, it should have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thanks.--Father Goose 23:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of RulesToConsider. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Father Goose 21:44, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi ESkog,
On my talk page, you said:
I have deleted Image:L&Bvan232005.png since its licensing specified that it could only be used to "further the aims of" some corporate interest. Since we cannot control what our downstream reusers do with our content, such a restriction is not really a viable license. If you have a different license you'd like to use, and you're sure you have the rights to release under that license, I'd be glad to undelete the image to allow you to do that. Wikipedia:Copyrights is an excellent policy page for further reading on this topic. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I replied:
- ESkog, Thanks for advising me about this. The Lynton & Barnstaple Railway is not actually a commercial concern, it is a registered charity, and although it does have a commercial arm, it is never going to be commercially viable! I can't remember exactly which image you're talking about, but if you can reinstate it temporarily, I will look into the licensing issues, and see if it can be reclassified. Many thanks, Lynbarn 17:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for reinstating the image. This, along with a few others I have used, have now been released into the public domain by their respective authors, and the appropriate licence details is now attached. Again, many thanks, Lynbarn 19:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
When you removed the image gallery from Blancmange (band), you also introduced link errors into the article. Please try to avoid doing this in the future. Thanks. Memphisto 12:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Second Wizard War[edit]
You said on the AfD that you'd be willing to move to userspace. I'd like to try to incorporate as much of the information that needs to be into the other HP articles. Would you mind putting it in my sandbox? I'd be thankful. i (said) (did) 03:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Would you mind emailing it to me? therequiembellishere@gmail.com. Therequiembellishere 23:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Deleted image[edit]
I uploaded an image and provided source, licensing information, and detailed fair use rationale. The reasons given for speedy deleting the image were AP photos are blatant copyvio and AP photos are not fair-use. I've never heard of this. Can you tell me whether AP images are blatant copyvio and are not fair-use. Thanks. Jreferee (Talk) 10:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Non-canonical spells in Harry Potter[edit]
Is there any way for you to send the code to me so I can merge it with Spells in Harry Potter? Therequiembellishere 15:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- An editor has asked for a deletion review of Non-canonical spells in Harry Potter. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
- I have the code on my computer now, thanks! Therequiembellishere 15:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
IP User 74.73.251.39[edit]
User_talk:74.73.251.39 They have erased your warning, I put it back, but I thought you should know they are a severe vandal. They keep adding false information to the EJ Wells page along with ignoring warnings from various editors. Thank you for your dilligence. CelticGreen 18:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
IP User 41.241.46.104/202[edit]
User_talk:41.241.46.104 has repeatedly added their assumptions to teh Santo DiMera and Colleen Brady pages regarding their ages and when the Santo/Colleen story happened. Days of our Lives has said the story takes place in the 50s yet this person repeatedly changes the ages and dates of death to these two charcters. When they were originally warned, they changed their IP and continue to vandalize the pages. Your assistance would be appreciated.CelticGreen 19:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- again I request an explanation as to why this person can vandalize a page and put their assumptions and a person putting the correct information gets an unfounded warning?CelticGreen 20:35, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use Image:Juliet Harmer in Adam Adamant Lives.JPG[edit]
If it is you who has removed this image, would you please explain why? It is a rare item. IXIA 21:07, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Your message did not really explain because it was cast in the sort of mysterious language that maybe appeals to teachers of maths in the States! I did seek to post a note explaining why it should be retained. Might have been more helpful if you had responded constructively to that, setting out why it was still deficient, rather than moving to exercise your awsome powers. But never mind. As so often, Wikipedia tends to be the worse for this sort of thing. IXIA 15:19, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
I appreciate the courtesy of your reply, but an image created now of an actress who was well-known in Britain for a few years only in the mid 1960s would scarcely have much point. It's important to show her in main starring role. It seems inconceivable that anyone would raise any objection to the use of such a picture - one no doubt widely distributed and in my possession for over 40 years. I do feel sometimes that some deleters have little better to do or, at least, do insufficient to establish the circumstances of their actions. Anyway, as I say, it's W's loss - but thanks again for replying promptly and offering an explanation. IXIA 17:09, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Just to let you know, this page which you just speedied has immediately been recreated.... ChrisTheDude 13:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I think this now-banned user, User:Mattbroon, is a sockpuppet of another editor, possibly one of the editors or IP addresses who have been defaming User:Haemo at his RFA and who vandalized my talk page. Yet I have only suspicions, but no proof at my finger tips. What should I do? Bearian 18:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- Here's one diff [3]. Bearian 18:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- So here's another odd attack: [4] Bearian 18:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- This is the bit about User:Vodak being a puppet of User:Malber: [5]. My suspicions are that Malber is the puppetmaster of the IP address who vandalized my talk page, and of Mattbroon as well. Am I being a bad boy, not to assume good faith here? Bearian 18:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. Later. Bearian 19:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I have been working on the Rare FM page and I noticed that you recently removed the image from it. Please could you explain why? - I suspect it is tied to copyright and fair-use reasons, but I have yet to find clear instructions on uploading images and providing suitable rationales for them. If you are able to explain this, it will enable me to supply a suitable image for the page with a rationale. (Please note, I did not upload the original image.) Thanks. Wolf of Fenric 20:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- Do you know how to provide a rationale? Thanks. Wolf of Fenric 22:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for that. Wolf of Fenric 22:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Hi, I've taken the liberty to restore the above image to the White Horse Inn page: I had just failed to add a fair use rationale before the deadline set by WhateverBot. Hope you don't mind. Best wishes, <KF> 17:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Kansas City "Killa City" edit[edit]
Thanks for reverting my mistake. I meant to remove the claim that I thought 24.124.90.106 had added when really he had deleted it and I added it back. It is unsourced weaseling and probably just plan vandalism. Thanks again Grey Wanderer | Talk 19:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
FUCC issue[edit]
You deleted Image:Lycoming logo.png stating that there was no FUCC. I see one. Am I missing something? Maury 12:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
