This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Zscout, if you have OTRS access, would you mind looking up a ticket for me for File:Irene McGee.jpg. It says McGee owns the copyright, but I've found it in an article attributed to a Danny Wong. [4] He may have passed the copyright to her. The ticket ID is 689064. Cheers, SlimVirgintalk|contribs 10:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Danny Wong was also credited in the image description page. Probably is a work for hire, so OTRS accepted the image. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 18:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
It was me who added his name to the image page recently. Does the ticket mention him? SlimVirgintalk|contribs 06:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
No, but all indications point out that the image is a work for hire and she is able to release it. Permission granted since 2007. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your kind assistance in helping me to find the image for the article! Flickr user has agreed to release the image with a free license. Best wishes--Mbz1 (talk) 02:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
So what's happening with the article now? Is it going to pass the Feature Article criteria? Thanks, Davtra(talk) 03:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
It was removed due to lack of reviewers. Anyways, I am going to give it another shot, but wanted to see if you want to make more grammar changes (or anything else) before I send it for round 4. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 03:41, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Heraldry WikiProject
I saw your name at the Heraldry WikiProject, and there is a discussion at the WikiProject Heraldry about certain heraldic practices. I do not know if you are familiar with heraldic rules, but if you are could you weigh in so there is a larger discussion? Also, there are images on my user page here, and part of the discussion is whether or not they are beautiful or hideous, please comment on that if you would as well. [tk]XANDERLIPTAK 16:03, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Russian national anthem
I checked the history for the Russian national anthem and did move the parody that Glenn Beck did to the Soviet national anthem like you suggested. Thanks for letting me know. Chris (talk) 19:31, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Np. There is now an .SVG image of the 1968-1918 Croatian flag, i.e. that of the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia File:Flag of Croatia-Slavonia.svg. --DIREKTOR(TALK) 07:07, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Thaks :) --DIREKTOR(TALK) 07:14, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:St-commander first class.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
Hey I see that you was somewhat involved in helping the article become a "FA" status. I would love to see the Japanese version of the Selena page to be a "FA" status, if you can I would help as much as I can! Thank you AJona1992 (talk) 18:59, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
It has been so long since I even worked on the article. I think I maybe did something with the images. My Japanese is alright, but not good enough to write full fledge articles like this. I can ask my buddies if they want to write one. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 20:27, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Quick fix
Wonder if you could help me fix Template:Country data Yugoslavia & Template:Country data Serbia and Montenegro, or unblock them briefly? I would like to insert the very many non-listed flags from the List of Yugoslav flags. Its really a lot of work, and the templates are sorely in need of expanding. I don't even want to list all the issues, is there any way you can unblock the templates for a day? --DIREKTOR(TALK) 15:33, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
FIAV
You seem to feel find in ignoring the discussion at FIAV talk page that points out Wikipedia policy that GrahamPadruig may have a conflict of interest and the fact the article is not following the English naming policy. Spshu (talk) 16:52, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I can tell you from experience is that when it comes to FIAV, it is more known by those letters, coming from the French name, than by the English name. If you take a look at Wikipedia:Article_titles#Foreign_names_and_anglicization, it says "If there are too few English-language sources to constitute an established usage, follow the conventions of the language appropriate to the subject (German for German politicians, Portuguese for Brazilian towns, and so on)." There is no established usage of the English title except at the FIAV Constitution. Even at the website, http://www.fiav.org/FIAV.html, you will see the URL is at the French title, the publications are in the French name and the French name is primary. The article is going to stay at FIAV because this is the most established name that I can find, and this is what it was before you started to move it around. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 22:05, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Image fix?
Hello, I noticed you made the image on top of fansub a few years ago, the Japanese text in katakana is not very correct, could you change it? Sorry if this is the wrong place to bring it up. Wekhter (talk) 02:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Tell me what the katakana should be and I will fix it. Plus, surprised yall are using this image. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Really it doesn't make sense for there to be katakana at all since something like this would just be written in English... Still, I think it would be better to say アイワンツービーウィスユーフォーエヴァ. Mostly the problem was the use of "WI" which is basically obsolete... W* sounds are made using ウ usually, I've even seen "want" written as ウァント. Otherwise I took out the ト at the end of want because in this situation it's followed by "to" and the long vowel sound off the end of forever. Also note that a more correct "to" would be トゥ but I think saying "tsu" instead is more common so I let it be. Wekhter (talk) 00:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
There is a version without the katakana so I will go ahead and revert it. I will play around with the image tomorrow. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 02:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:ST-Sector Admiral.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:ST-Fleet Captain.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:ST-Fleet Captain TNG.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
For getting Belarus to featured and to the main page. A very enjoyable read. meshach (talk) 00:43, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Zscout370. You have new messages at Tadija's talk page. Message added 11:57, 27 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Books. Awards of Belarus
Hello. Have found on the "Orders, decorations and... Belarus" discussion page a request for books, devoted to belawards. If the author is Isaeva, then here. Tnen there is a book, dedicated to the awards of Ministry of Interior Affairs. Left klick to 'depositfile.com'. Best regards. SZv (talk) 19:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
P.S. This book is 2004 year. There is a new version of the book (2007) exists. But this will also do.SZv (talk) 19:15, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
No problem then.)) SZv (talk) 21:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I've recently found some other books (a collection from 4 books) with Belarusian awards. I know they were issued in 2010 in Moscow but don't remember the (three) authors and the publisher. If you get interested I can try to learn some information. SZv (talk) 19:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I am still trying to find books about the Belarusian flag (after 1995) and still trying to get technical specifications of the Belarusian flag. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 19:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
СТБ 911-2008 "National flag of the Republic of Belarus. General technical specifications". I'll look for it somewhere and will take a foto of it or scan. As concerns books, there is one author Rassadin S.E., doctor of historic sciences, his has a book about a flag and coat of arms. But it is appeared not long ago and very small (111 pages). SZv (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Go ahead and keep the files the same. Commons sucks when it comes to categories because they always change depending on what a user feels or how the wind blows. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 18:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
US flag colors
Greetings, I just noticed the US flag image has been changed. Honestly, I am not a big fan of the Cable Colors, but I do recognize that they are the official color shades in the US flag (as mentioned in DDD-F-416F: FEDERAL SPECIFICATION - FLAG, NATIONAL, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND FLAG, UNION JACK (as of 31 March 2005)). The only thing that is said about the colors in the 2005 document is they are OG Red, OG Blue and White. The values listed on page 23 of the document, which comes from the 9th edition of the Standard Color Card of the United States. This color spec was from 1959 when Hawaii joined the Union. If I can make a statement, the reason why we came up with the Pantone shades is that we had no way to calculate cable colors from earlier sources and everything we come up with will be strange. http://london.usembassy.gov/rcflags.html came up with the Pantone, but some other sites use Pantone 282 C for the blue. The state of Texas changed their flag colors to match the US Pantone specs (281 C and 193 C) and we used http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx for the Pantone shades. http://www.mcc.gov/mcc/press/branding/branding-mcc/index.shtml is also using the US flag shades and matches the Pantone that we have. I still think #9B1C2C, #FFF, #33335F should be the new colors of the flag, since it is close to what we have with the Pantone. I am not sure what you feelings are about this, but I did wish I was asked. Frankly, I do not have my heart set on what is used, but we just need not only to be accurate, show people where we get Munsell colors from (I personally use http://www.eonet.ne.jp/~s-inoue/CO6_henkan/index-a.html) and make it match for the other flags. If you want, I can email you this document and see what else I can find out. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 05:59, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I’m having trouble understanding quite what your jumbled paragraph above is trying to say. Can you separate your points into a paragraph or list item each, and try to clarify each one? –jacobolus(t) 12:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I wrote it at 2 am, so I apologize about that. Sent a broken down response. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 18:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Ok. The main thing I wanted to get at is I wish yall talked to me before the color change, so I would have been able to send you documents.
The Pantone values (like 281) were easy to find, but the proper shades were a pain until Pantone put their colors online.
I still prefer that we use Pantone, but what program did you use to get the Munsell colors? I use a Japanese site to get mine. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 18:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
There was discussion up on the article’s talk page and the image description page at the commons for over a month before anything else was done; sorry, I just assumed anyone interested would be watching those. As for Munsell numbers, those were directly given in the JOSA paper. (Note that I used the xyY numbers from that paper to derive RGB values.) I can send you a copy of the paper if you like. If you’re more generally interested in converting Munsell <-> CIE coordinates, I’ve written some python code to do that. We could talk more about it. Feel free to leave messages here or shoot me an email. –jacobolus(t) 23:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Using the same colors as the official graphic provided by the State Of Washington
Zscout370, In my opinion, even if we acquired a 100% spot on way for calculating cable colors, it would be of no use because the Cable Colors are a Textile Color Standard, which can't be converted to RGB accurately due to their nature, unlike Pantones which are nice and solid colors.
Not only that, but 5 different U.S. Embassies cite the same Pantones as the colors of the U.S. flag, from Slovenia, Serbia, Paris, London,and Jakarta, and the consulate in Hong Kong all citing Pantones, along with the fact when I attempt to convert the Washington State Flag to Cable Colors, it looks vastly different and completely wrong, which Jacobolus cites as being due to Cable Colors apparently having large color blocks which only adds to the nonconvertible of it which I provides a example of here.
Flag of Banovina
Hi. Could i ask you to lock this article Banovina of Croatia or to warn the user for edit war. See the history. I made my edits according to this source. Thnaks in advance. --Ex13 (talk) 21:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
СТБ 911-2008
I've found it and made e-copy. Unfortunately, our local ADSL-model broke and I'm not able to send for the moment. I went directly to National fund of technical law documents to find an English equivalent, but they don't have even Belarusian one. Only ISO and other international standards are presented in several languages. Ang15 (talk) 14:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
My reading Russian is decent, so I will figure it out. I have a lot of standards not in English and those were easy to figure out. Thanks. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
When will you be in irc? I'll send it through irc. These are fotos, as they don't have a scanner. To tell the truth, they don't allow to foto anything, only to make black-and-white printouts from their xerox, thats why I managed to take fotos only of first pages. The others are made of printouts. But it not a huge problem: this standard contains only two identical drafts of the flag. A colour one is on the page with changings, and the other black-and-white is in the standard itself. Ang15 (talk) 17:36, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
On the MOS:JP talk page, a discussion has been started about including or not including romanizations for words of English origin, such as Fainaru Fantajī in Final Fantasy (ファイナルファンタジー, Fainaru Fantajī) (for the sake of simplicity, I called this case "words of English origin", more information on semantics here).
Over the course of a month, it has become apparent that both the parties proposing to include or not include those romanizations cannot be convinced by the arguments or guidelines brought up by the other side. Therefore, a compromise is trying to be found that will satisfy both parties. One suggestion on a compromise has been given already, but it has not found unanimous agreement, so additional compromises are encouraged to be suggested.
One universally accepted point was to bring more users from the affected projects in to help achieve consensus, and you were one of those selected in the process.
What this invitation is:
You should give feedback on the first suggested compromise and are highly encouraged to provide other solutions.
What this invitation is not:
This is not a vote on including or excluding such romanizations.
This is not a vote on compromises either.
It would be highly appreciated if you came over to the MOS:JP talk page and helped find a solution. Thank you in advance. Prime Blue (talk) 11:30, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Flag of Japan
Hello.
You is the user with the largest number of editions in the article of Flag of Japan. In the Portuguese Wikipedia the article of Flag of Japan is the same, except that in Portuguese. I work in creat articles for "to blue" the article in Portuguese Wikipedia. And I realized that both articles in both languages are dead links. And earnestly ask, is not there a way to recover the dead links or substitute another source? In the Internet Archive failed, In this sites Category:Web archives could be good? I believe that the best way would be to find another source.
Thank you for your attention. Sorry my bad English. Bruno Ishiai (talk) 22:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Really thank you. Put to vote !!!!!!!!!! Bruno Ishiai (talk) 02:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
The block
I must admit I'm somewhat annoyed at your ignoring my response to your block. Zscout, please take the time to note my efforts at discussing with the other guy. Please note that the guy's new edit was reverted and that he continued to edit-war, all the while ignoring any discussion and posting a meaningless link to some private website he likes in one edit summary. Typical disruptive behavior, textbook stuff. I get the feeling someone else might've banned just the other guy, certainly not give them "equal treatment". What was I supposed to do? Leave the wrong flag on? And it is wrong I assure you. Croatian nationalists just like to see as much of the coat of arms as possible. :) --DIREKTOR(TALK) 00:26, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
It does. It takes one user to start the war, and it takes one user to perpetuate it by ignoring discussion. Treating everyone "fair an equal" only seems right at first glance. It actually almost never is. --DIREKTOR(TALK) 01:47, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Then what I suggest is to take it to a higher DR, such as a request for comment where you can involve the entire community. BTW, this is has nothing to do with the Kosovo template at all. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 01:50, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the contributions to Flag of Singapore
Hi Zscout370, just wanted to thank you for all the excellent contributions you have made to articles on national flags. I'm from Singapore, so seeing the Flag of Singapore article go live on the Main Page today is nothing short of cool. And since today is National Day in my country. May you continue making all these wonderful contributions. Cheers, ANGCHENRUITalk♨ 03:33, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
If you wouldn't mind:
AngChenrui has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Literal quote?
I don't know if you quote from spoken or written text, but proper German grammar would require the quite on your front page to be capitalized and punctuated as "Zurück an die Arbeit, Du fauler Sack!" (German capitalizes all nouns, not just proper nouns). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I've finally managed to find technical specifications of white-red-white flag of Belarus. If you are interested I can send it too. But the color model, used in the flag is Soviet one (1986). I tried to find Pantone, but failed. Ang15 (talk) 15:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Considering that the present flag does not use Pantone (uses CIE 1964), it is ok. Sure, send it please. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 15:45, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
BTW, how good are you getting standards from the other Soviet Republics? I have a list for you. I already got those of Belarus (with thanks to you), Russia, Kazakhstan and some hints about Ukraine. Care to help? User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 15:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
the position and large of the coat of arms is correct, only the border is bad, since it is a copy-paste i made, because i have no clue. :) so can you make the svg version and the border correct? thanks Icaf (talk) 17:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I see. I thought the coa is a little bit larger but in the most cases it is just as it is in your svg-flag. but i noticed that the coat of arms is not really in the center of the flag... could you move it closer to the center?
And I have another question: There is another unnofficial German flag, with a version of the German eagle (used by the federal institutions) in the center. Is that flag also available on commons? thank you Icaf (talk) 18:56, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
if it is not available, could you create it please? please give me an answer, thank you very much Icaf (talk) 01:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
If you are preoccupied at the moment, please tell me Icaf (talk) 15:36, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
A finial to white-red-white flag of Belarus
A message. Ang15 (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
A book about the flag
While gathering information for the article in Russian wikipedia, I found a book, devoted to what the colors of the flag mean. There was a kind of competition, were people, scientist, artists, students, prepared texts about what the flag means. It contains the speech of Lukashenko, joint text and texts of winners. You, as I remember, tried to find a book about the flag. I may also send it. But later. Ang15 (talk) 13:18, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm able to send it. Ang15 (talk) 21:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
And I just got everything working on my computer again. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 15:21, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Roublezone (band) article
Hi, Zscout370! I have an intention to create in Wiki the article about one of the greatest belarussian hard-rock bands ever - Roublezone. So, hereby I kindly ask you to give me some guidelines and probably some advice, 'cause I'm not experienced wikipedian yet )))))) DzimOzz ►
Well, you can check it here. Also, in 1995 they won 3 awards at national belarusian ceremony Rock Crown (that's if you know russian).They released the only album "Put your money... Now!", but it's still considered as the best belarusian hard-rock album ever. Enjoy! I think, there would be problems with the article... It's not so hard to prove, that band is NOTABLE, but it's hard to find RELIABLE sources, 'cause they are mostly in russian or byelorussian Dzimozz (talk) 20:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Because the sources are in Belarusian or Russian is not a reason to reject an article. I personally wrote some articles here that most of the sources are in two those languages, Chinese and or Japanese. I wish I have time to help you out, but I will think of something in the next few days. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 00:55, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Handling a blocked user with a new account
I noticed you were the one who blocked 71.68.251.54 and wanted to let you know that he's back as user 0a9s8d77as9d8g87dgas6rd143 and spamming the same stuff on human evolution-related talk pages as he did on Talk:Human evolution. What's the proper procedure for handling this? I don't usually get involved in this kind of stuff. – VisionHolder « talk » 02:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
How do I go about requesting the block? Or are you just saying we should give it up and start ignoring him at this point? – VisionHolder « talk » 03:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I am an admin, so I can apply the blocks. I am trying a few other options, but I will not discuss those here. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 03:34, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm content with that. Thank you for your time and attention. – VisionHolder « talk » 03:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I've found in Polish Wikipedia colors of the flag by Pantone.
Colors of the Belarusian flag, Pantone
Red
Green
White
1795c
370c
Safe
Source: Payrat A. Album des pavillons nationaux et des marques distinctives. — Paris, 2000.
You may know this, but I think the talk page will survive))).
I'm already finishing writing the article. Having finished it I'll give it to you to read and to criticize. You, as I remember, offered help.) Peaces of advice of more experienced users will be helpful. Ang15 (talk) 20:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
We used to have that information in the English Wikipedia article until I took it out. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
What was the reason? 195.222.67.70 (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Done. I've already finished writing. The system of reviewing in Russian Wikipedia is rather weak, especially concerning articles about Belarus. So I decided to give it to read to competent people. Ang15 (talk) 15:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Most of the times, pages about symbols are copied from legal texts and that is it. It is the same in the English Wikipedia. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
It is really so. Huge passages are from laws and decrees (especially the usage of the flag). It bothers me. But, to tell the truth, I don't know, exept atricles in some newspapers or rare books about the flag, where to find information. I visited national library. What they gave me is this 3 books. Ang15 (talk) 19:27, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
No one would give me information because I am in the USA. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 02:59, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Also, can you resend me the old Belarusian flag stanadard document, along with the image of the finial you want me to draw? I believe those files were lost when my hard drive died. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 03:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
No problem. Also, if don't mind I can enhance the article in English Wikipedia from non(?)electronic sources I found. I suppose it to become quiet a huge article, as I will not cut the article into three useless articles (about the white-red-white flag and the flag of BSSR). Ang15 (talk) 16:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
We have articles already about the BySSR and w/r/w flags. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 16:03, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry. Your thruth. Except the redirection to Flag of Belarus, when I put down "w/r/w flag" in the search line. Ang15 (talk) 16:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
State of War?
Declaration of war discusses the vague beginnings of war, and we can see that a declaration to start a war is not required. Indeed, we can see different wars going on, petering out, and then reviving. Or we see wars that have an end in some formal sense, only to start up again in some other fashion. India-Pakistan have had lots of wars with each other, and some of them are discussed in WP. Is their conflict one long war or a series of short wars? Were they/are they technically in a state of war (even when they exchange cricket teams)? Considering how varied and vague a "beginning" of a war is, it is not surprising that the end of any particular war is even more varied and vague. Is a "declaration of peace" or "peace treaty" necessary for a war or state of war to end? I think not. But we (editors & general population) are using the term "technically at war" without really knowing what it means. I pointed out that Japan surrendered to the Soviets & West with the Instrument of Surrender. Since we know that occurred, how can Japan be in a "state of war" or "at war" with the powers that defeated it and occupied it? And what about all those wars throughout history that ended without a declaration of peace or peace treaty? Are all of those wars continuing in a "technical" sense? In our case involving Japan, we do have a situation where the 1956 declaration attempted to resolve the situation. I thank you, Zscout370, for the information. And since we have a specific reference to it, we can put it in the article and describe the situation with some precision. My main beef is with all those other articles that refer to this nonsensical term "technical state of war".--S. Rich (talk) 20:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
The problems I was having with the Russian side is I found very few items from official government sources that spoke about the conflict. A lot of items I found on websites from *.gov.ru was commentary that was saved on government websites that praised Putin (either as President or Prime Minister). The only clear statement I have is from the Japanese; the Russians said peace is present despite the lack of a formal peace treaty http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/06/11/9599212.htmlUser:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:53, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Did you give me this reference: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/europe/russia/territory/edition92/preface.html ? I lost track. In any event, the Japan MofFA refers to the Oct 19, 1956 Joint Declaration and says the state of war had formally ended. I've linked this reference in a few of the Japan/war articles. My point remains -- saying a "technical state of war" exists does not mean anything because we cannot define what the phrase means. We know what a Declaration of War is, and we know what a Peace Treaty is, and we know what an Armistice is. All of these can be defined. But when we allow the undefined term "technical state of war" into articles, then we open the door to POV editing. In particular, we see such editing in Korea articles. I'm trying to put an end to that stuff, and one method (I hope) is to put an end to this "technical state of war" nonsense. That's for your reply, Zscout370. Happy editing!--S. Rich (talk) 05:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it was me who gave the reference. I study both countries and I do have a book about the Japanese at the San Francisco Peace Conference (ISBN0231055145) so I can look in there. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 05:33, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Rowland Goodman's images
I've begun a discussion on the admin's noticeboard on Commons regarding this editor's uploads to Commons. You may wish to participate. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:38, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
I tend to agree with the current consensus to have the images removed from the Commons. I tried an outreach to the guy and not sure if he has said anything back yet. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Aircraft markings
Hello and thanks you for your help. Hope we will stay in touch and hope you will correct all the USA roundels, because it is such a mess there. Best regards! --Kwasura (talk) 21:28, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Disney Channel 2007.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Union Flag Speification
Hello, I notice that you deleted the file UnionJackSpecification.png citing that it was a copyright violation. I can assure you that it is not. It was drawn by myself (using MS Paint). I did use Bartram's book as one reference but it is not a scanned image. Further, if you look closely you will see that there are differences: e.g. in the construction lines, placement of the sizes text/proportions etc. Invariably they will appear similar since they are both based on the Admiralty's UJ specification. I don't agree with that (talk) 21:13, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
It was too close to the original, especially with the placement of the dots for the colors. I will come up with something in SVG to replace that drawing. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:46, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:St-commander first class.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
Hello. I was wondering if you could do me a favour and clarify your position on including mention of notable fans in rugby league team articles at the Sydney Roosters' talk page. I've brought up the ambiguity here. Cheers.--Jeff79 (talk) 18:32, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Why did you decline this? The edits made not by me are all additions of wikilinks, which I don't think is "significant." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 04:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I feel a G7 would not have been appropriate given how long the article has been on Wikipedia. If you made it a week ago, I would have granted it. But not three years. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
The G7 criterion says nothing about how long the article's been around. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 04:41, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Regardless, a speedy deletion can be declined or any or no reason at all. I suggest that you take it to AFD. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:44, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Are you allergic to speedy deletion or something? Seems no one wants to speedy delete anything anymore. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 04:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
If I have personal doubts, I let others comment about it. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:54, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Some time ago I asked for help to help you with links in the article on Japan's flag on wikipedia Lusophone, who is now a featured article, do not remember if I ever thanked you, today thank you for your help and attention. Good editions. Bruno Ishiai (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
I am very glad. I noticed on the second FAC page that there was some questions about the sources or timeline. Can you tell me what those are and I can try and fix it. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 08:12, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry but I did not understand what you mean. Bruno Ishiai (talk) 11:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Interested?
I saw you work on flag articles. Could you help the Flag of Bhutan article. I want to try to get it to GA. If your not interested it's ok. Spongie555 (talk) 06:35, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
I saw you nominated it for GA. Lets hope it passes. Spongie555 (talk) 19:27, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Permission to use 'Flag of Antarctica (Smith).svg'
Hi Zscout370. Would you give your permission to distribute the File:Flag_of_Antarctica_(Smith).svg image with FLOSS video game Freeciv under the GNU GPL v2 license? You would naturally be credited among the graphic contributors. Thanks. :) Himasaram (talk) 20:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes. If you need any flag images for this game, please let me know and I will do my best to dig it up. I would prefer if you would credit me as my real name, Zachary Harden (this is on the main user page). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 11:11, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Zachary. Will make sure that your credits are in order. Himasaram (talk) 02:16, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi -- Thanks very much for sending the Lupant doc. This is the first new information I've seen in ages, and it really puts the whole flag problem in a very new light. For example, the existence of a flag from 1947, even without an image, begins to explain why the anecdotal information in the CBS doc remembers a flag with a green dragon -- I'd be willing to bet that the dragon in 1947 was green. The new picture of the 1949 flag (figure 7 in Lupant) makes it quite clear that the 1949 dragon was not, despite the CBS description.
The images from Lupant also make it clear that the flag was very much in flux between 1949 and 1970, with varying background colors; varying colors for the dragon; the dragon sometimes curved, sometimes straight; sometimes facing left, sometimes right; the boundary of the background sometimes going from upper left to lower right, sometimges upper right to lower left (and Lupant describes this incorrectly for figure 7). It is now clear that several designs were made and probably no one of them had "official" status exclusive of the others. In many cases, the author admits that he cannot tell definitively whether the design is the obverse or the reverse of the flag, which is a bit problematic; but the sheer variety of designs is now clear.
There is unfortunately a big problem: Lupant does not appear to be a published source. There is no bibliographic information that can be used in a reference -- the author's very identity is not clearly indicated. I confess I'm not sure how we can use this information.
I agree completely that we need to bring more sources to bear on the article, especially since we know that the CBS doc is not entirely trustworthy. Lupant would be a good start toward that if it can somehow become a published source. In the meantime, however, it is important to acknowledge when the source of information goes back to the CBS document (and we must be very careful even with Lupant, since CBS is one of his primary sources). It is misleading to credit a different source if that other source is just reporting it from the CBS document. GA guidelines don't simply want different sources, they want independent sources.
Because maybe a lack of standards, the various designs and positions of the dragons. I sat through this lecture last year by Lupant and a lot of the talk was of the various flags used in Bhutan and also his spread of vexillology in that country. He did a similar lecture about the flags of the Sikhim, which I believe have a presence in Bhutan.
There are references in the paper, you just have to look at the very bottom. Sources are required for papers presented at each International Congress of Vexillology and papers such as this has been approved for use before. How I got hold of this paper was because I received it from the author directly to publish all of the papers from that conference.
With a flag like Bhutan, sourcing is going to suck. For all we know, the CBS document might have started some flag myths that are being spread about in the country. The document was published in the late 90s/early 2000s, so who knows. I still have a few tricks up my sleeve, but really, there is only so much I can do with this article despite what I know about flags. There is not much about this country to where I can do anything. My last hope is to contact http://www.sqca.gov.bt/contactus.html to see if they got flag standards. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 05:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, there are some references in the paper, but most of the important things are photographs and letters attributed mostly to private sources -- they're important witnesses but not published sources, and therefore problematic as references. Take the letter from the Queen Mother: unless that's posted on the Kuensel site somewhere, it's not really usable -- but it's the only source in Lupant for the 1947 flag. This is very frustrating! -- Elphion (talk) 06:22, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Sometimes there are sources that I have to claw for and takes years to get. Flag_of_Japan#Design took a few years an two trips to Japan to figure it out. Flag_of_Belarus#Design took about 7 years at least. Something is better than nothing but I do feel your frustration. I wish I can find out more information but some countries are not hard pressed to give out flag information. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 06:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Was an indefinite move protection necessary? I was going to request a month so The Charmed One can attempt to form a new consensus. Also could you protect the other seasons' pages?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Indef is indetermined, so it can be lifted anytime. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 08:30, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Bhutan
Thanks for your help on the Flag of Bhutan article. WikiProject Bhutan could use some help on articles of Bhutan. The article on the Bhutan national anthem and Emblem are stubs and even the main Bhutan article is a demoted FA. We could use your exspertice in this areas. But i know you work more on Belarus articles but Bhutan articles need some help too. You dont have to help if you dont want too. Spongie555 (talk) 02:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Symbols are my forte, even if I am not familiar with the country. I do work on Belarus, but also on Japan and other countries that need my help. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Bhutan symbol articles are very bad usually one paragraph stubs. The flag of Bhutan article was interesting to see that someone else(not counting you) was working on it. Usually WikiProject Bhutan people help get monasteries to DYK or GA(WikiProject Bhutan only has 4 GAs) nobody works on the symbols of Bhutan so the articles are pathetic. Spongie555 (talk) 22:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Your opinion please
You deleted the article on Jeffrey H. Norwitz some time ago. We discussed its deletion, when I became aware of it.
It seemed to me to be a specific instance of a couple of phenomenon I find generally disturbing.
I raised it as related to the discussion as to whether we should have suppressed news of David Rohde's kidnapping.
I hope you agree I characterized your position accurately.
Have you given its deletion any further thought since we corresponded over it? Geo Swan (talk) 19:16, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
You stated my views correctly. When we delete for OTRS, we are under no obligation to inform users of the deletion and we are given latitute. As for me reconsidering the deletion, I usually never give it a second thought until I am asked to by users. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 05:05, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Admin help needed
Hi Zach -I've got a problem which needs an uninvolved admin's help. There's a problem user at South Island nationalism. He's playing within the rules, but he's definitely "playing". A few months ago, User:Teroamahai seems to have noticed that South Island nationalism existed and created his own North Island nationalism, which was quickly deleted (there's no such movement). Since then, he's been active at the SI-nat article, firstly launching an attack on it in the talk page, then adding incorrect information (with support from an anon, which is almost certainly the same editor). He's now started "working to rule" by excising large chunks of the article because they weren't well-sourced. That's certainly within WP's policies and guidelines, but it's the way it's being done, after an extremely cursory note on the talk page, that is a cause for concern, as is his contention that he'll remove more unless someone can think up a reasonable reason for their inclusion (he's never listened to reasonable reason regarding the article in the past, it's to be seriously doubted that he will now).
Problem is, I'm too involved to do much - I've made quite a lot of edits to the page, and have been involved in South Island movements (including designing one of the flags shown on the page). I've protected the page after the latest bout of removals - something I probably shouldn't have done, though I've made a reasonable justification for it on the talk page, I think, and a lot of the information about what's ben going on is listed there. Can I ask you to have a look at the page and remove my protection, and either leave it unprotected or add your own protection as you see fit? I left a message for another admin to have a look, but it looks like they're on a wikibreak, so nothing's happened in a couple of weeks. Sorry to get you involved in this, but it's been going on a bit too long to be comfortable... Grutness...wha? 22:12, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Grutness...wha? 07:27, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Doomsday BYT.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Doomsday BYT.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:37, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
AWB
Hi there Zscout370. Just letting you know I've removed your account from the AWB list of bots (you added yourself here). You should not run bots on your main account, but as an administrator, you will have access to AWB's non-bot functions. If you wish to run an AWB-bot, please go through a BRfA to obtain approval. Cheers, - Kingpin13 (talk) 00:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Admins should be able to run bot like functions, especially if we are going to do replacing of images or whatnot for deletion. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 09:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Could you take a look, please?
I happened to notice Courtesy flag has a PROD tag on it, because the article is unsourced. Any chance that you, as the resident vexillologist, could take a look? I seem to have the strangest things on my watchlist... Risker (talk) 21:16, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey, sorry for delay. I am not sure it's worth it. It's only 5 pages. Plus they say nothing on payment methods. I would be shocked if they accepted credit cards. I would think they would only take bank transfers, which for me would cost triple the price of the booklet. Can you survive without it? :) Renata (talk) 18:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
I can. I figured it is another chance to see what is mentioned for the state flag and improve our articles. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 19:15, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
There is a change on the seal of the University. Texts that surrounds the seal has been added. Since you are the author of this file, if you don't mind, could you update this SVG file? Here is the update seal in PNG: click here . For PDF version, click here (the updated seal is on PAGE 2 of the PDF, upper left hand corner).
I look forward to your positive response. Thank you.
Anyoflores (talk) 06:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, the standards can be very high when certain people are reviewing—perhaps unfairly high. The only reason I wasn't keen on supporting after tweaking the article myself was that I could no longer look at the article from a fresh perspective. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 12:29, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Honestly, the more I read this article, the more interesting the topic seems. I made another pass of the first half today—I went pretty bold in some areas (perhaps too bold). I also left some inline queries—I think they can only be addressed by consulting the sources. [5]. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 01:26, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Request
Hello Zscout370
Would you be able to upload a new version of the flag and coat of arms of Serbia, based on the recent changes according to these ([6], [7], [8]) rough versions? - Buttons (talk) 01:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, previously the names of her two daughters were in the article, I don't know how public they are, this could be used to cite their names, a ppic from 2010 at the red carpet premier of flippedhttp://www.fotolog.com/celebrity_babies/75378985 - Off2riorob (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I would keep the name of her daughters out of the article. While I have seen it sourced in other places, we do not have to include everything about her. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 08:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, your right, I appreciate your comment, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Homo Pekinensis again
Hi - you blocked 68.222.236.154 and a follow-up sock. It looks like he's turned up again as 98.122.103.183. Same geographic location, same material. Would you mind blocking again? Thanks. VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 09:56, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Already blocked by the time I saw this. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC) (Note to the IP, Constitutional freedoms are not granted on Wikipedia).
Flag of Connecticut
Hello! Thanks for uploading a new flag in commons, but something is amiss -- if you look at any CT ratings page (ie: talk:ConnCAN), the flag now looks very compressed/stretched out in Internet Explorer while the shield is huge in Opera. Can you look into why that would be with this new image? Thanks, Markvs88 (talk) 18:55, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Purging your cache and also fixing the image width sizes. The reason why the image was changed because as I did some research on the state flag, I noticed the image we had did not match the stated legal ratio (which is almost square). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 08:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
The cache purge worked on IE, Opera just updated to v11 which fixed it there. Thanks! Best, Markvs88 (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Bhutan
I wanted to tell you the Flag of Bhutan article is finally starting to be reviewed for GA. Spongie555 (talk) 10:18, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Flag of New Milford, Connecticut.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Flag of New Milford, Connecticut.svg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission 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. Kellyhi! 09:28, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
I see the English name on the website saying New Taipei City, however I am seeing a lot of news sources use Xinbei City (and one government one at http://taiwanreview.nat.gov.tw/ct.asp?xitem=122236&ctnode=1446&mp=1). I also have seen government sources use both names but still use Xinbei City (with New Taipei City afterwards like this). My suggestion is to figure out who has the real control of naming cities in Taiwan and see what they say. If you like to continue this via email, you can email me at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Zscout370User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 08:16, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Please writing the mail ask for the Mayor of New Taipei City -- Eric Chu, Is he the Mayor of New Taipei, or Xinbei?
I must tell the all of the wikipedia:
Xinbei City -- Is the big mistake by Chou hsi-wei, the last Taipei County Magistrate.
New Taipei City -- Is the New English name that the most people of Taipei County want, and Eric Chu, the currect Mayor of the New Taipei City, he decided.
So, The English name of 新北市 is New Taipei City!
Repeat: Ask the Mayor Chu, please! -- If u think I made the lie.
I know you are not making this up, however as the other user mentioned, we on the English Wikipedia uses information from the Ministry of the Interior with regards to names. I did email the city as of now, but I also want you to take a look at http://www.tpc.gov.tw/web/News?command=showDetail&postId=202976 (so will I) and I hope this explains what is going on. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 09:05, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Pro bono proposal
Hi Zscout370. Thanks for your project idea for the Pro bono posting on the Reward Board. I'm thinking of extending the deadline for 3 months, to allow others more time to submit proposals. Or we could stay with the current 2010-12-31 deadline, and give out rewards to only those proposals that are submitted and acceptable. (And then do a repost, with a new deadline) As you're, so far, the only user to submit a proposal, I wanted to get your thoughts first before doing anything. Thanks! Eclipsed(talk)(code of ethics) 16:33, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Your money, your call. If you would like to make a repost again with one less reward, that is your call too. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 18:23, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Keeping the current reward as-is, with rewards going to up to 11 people who submit acceptable proposals, is probably best. Then the reward can 'roll-over' in 2011 with a new posting.
As an aside, I'd rate your proposal acceptable, but a stub and in need of expansion. And I see no problem with previous winners also submitting to the new 2011 posting. ;) Eclipsed(talk)(code of ethics) 20:03, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
I admit that it is a stub, but it is fairly straight forward. I will try and expand it in due time, mostly explaining what the goal is. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:24, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
But hey, 10 USD to help obtain a document will be awesome. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Please, do not return the pages!
As news sources: "New Taipei" is the English name of 新北 since December 2010, not may be, The Mayor Eric Chu said just is New Taipei, the currect name is New Taipei!
I don't have idea even if I was be blocked. But I must say the truth.
Repeat:
Please writing the mail ask for the Mayor of New Taipei City -- Eric Chu, Is he the Mayor of New Taipei, or Xinbei?
The E-Mail of Mayor Chu
Address: 台灣新北市板橋區中山路1段161號 / 161 Zhongshan Street, Banqiao District, New Taipei City, Taiwan
To:朱立倫 / Eric Chu
--75.65.40.180 (75.65.40.180) 02:00, December 26, 2010 (UTC)
I sent the email, but as explained to you by me and a few others, unless the Ministry of the Interior changes the name of the city, then we will have to keep it at Xinbei. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Change has been maded and article has been unlocked. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:52, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok thanks. Had to add an explanation, hope it will be fine now. Gryffindor (talk) 20:32, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, looks fine to me. I also made some changes to the text because I was given official specs for the new Myanmar flag. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 00:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Ukrainian flag colors
Hey, would you happen to have a source/copy of ДСТУ 4512:2006? This whole Ukrainian flag color thing is quite confusing. — Alex Khristov 12:47, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I been trying to obtain a copy since March, but either people I know from the Ukraine fell off from the face of the earth, Ukrainian Wikimedians do not have PayPal and many websites that sell the standard do not take US cards. I know the situation on the colors is confusing, so I was asked to solve it. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 18:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm on it. I had a friend help me with ordering a copy. — Alex Khristov 03:04, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
I think what I'll do is publish the contents of the standard to a website like Wikisource once I get it. It's not copyrighted since it's government work, so I think it's weird that they make people pay to get a copy of it. — Alex Khristov 06:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Scans can work for me too. I think it is very odd too since I was asked to pay money for the Armenian flag standard and others. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 06:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Bhutan
Lemurbaby found some more sources if it helps. Spongie555 (talk) 03:48, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for helping the Flag of Bhutan article get to GA status, hope to see you help with more Bhutanese articles in the future Spongie555 (talk) 23:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
this WikiAward was given to Zscout370 by Spongie555 (talk) on 23:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Also do you think the Bhutan article has a chance for GA?Spongie555 (talk) 01:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Image tagging for File:Li Xiannian.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Li Xiannian.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:05, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Fixed this for you. The bot is just stupid and not programmed properly since the source was there all along. I've made it a little more obvious now. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 08:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Please restore Gators head logo
Zscout370, please restore the deleted Gator head logo for the University of Florida Gators sports teams immediately. You have overstepped your bounds. There is no policy that justifies the removal of these logos in the manner in which you have done it. This was done in the dead of night, and presented as a fait accompli without discussion and without prior notice. Proper "fair use" justifications were provided on the file page for all team pages on which the image was used. The "Gators" script logo is NOT the primary logo of the Gators sports teams, is not used by any of the teams other than the football team, and the substitute you have put in place does not even use the correct colors. Your substitution of an improper logo, followed by the immediate deletion of the proper logo with the use of the "unused image" speedy deletion justification smacks of "boot-strapping." Your refusal to restore these images will result in an escalation of this dispute. Please respond. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 09:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Zscout370. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Please respond on your public talk page. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 09:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Agree completely with Dirtlawyer. As per many similar discussions over the years, there is still absolutely no reason to remove and/or delete properly used and labeled collegiate logos from articles about the schools' respective sports teams. Zeng8r (talk) 11:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Zen, please note: this abuser of proper process is an administrator. There was no notice of this proposed deletion on the file page, on the uploader's talk page or anywhere else: Zscout simply decided that "as a member of the SEC, I know this is right out." [sic] He then deleted the proper logo from the University of Florida page and each of the 18 Gators sports team articles, substituted the improper "Gators" script (which 20 of 21 Gators sports teams don't even use in any form or fashion) on each of the 18 Wikipedia pages for Gators sports team main articles, and then deleted the "fair use" file page of the proper Florida Gator head logo as an "unused media file." Just for good measure, Zscout labeled his edits as "minor." Nice, huh? I am deleting the improper logos from each of the article pages with a note referring them to this talk page. I have also filed a page restoration request. Any other suggestions how we should deal with this abusive nonsense problem? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I too would like to hear the justification for this.--Cúchullaint/c 14:47, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I also neglected to mention that reason F5 cited by Zscout as justification for his speedy deletion of the subject SVG file as "unused non-free media" allows that such files "may be deleted after being identified as such for more than seven days, or immediately if the image's only use was on a deleted article and it is very unlikely to have any use on any other valid article." The first criterion was clearly not satisfied, and the second criterion does not apply. Looks like we've broken our own speedy deletion rules again. Dirtlawyer1 (talk)
At the request of Dirtlawyer1, I have reviewed this too. Per discussion on my talk, the deletion does not appear to meet the criteria in WP:CSD#F5, so I hope you can explain what was done here. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 16:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I was asleep and got your emails. Heading to DRV now. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Zscout, at BHG's suggestion, no DRV has yet been filed. Please review the requirements for CSD F5 and acknowledge that you have failed to adhere to the required notice and 7-day waiting period. Regardless of the substantive merits of this matter, you appear to have improperly deleted all 19 uses of the subject file, as well as the file itself, outside of the required guidelines and procedural rules. There is also the small substantive matter that 20 of 21 Florida Gators sports teams do not use the script Gators logo as their emblem. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, the DRV was not set up yet. Ok, the image has been restored as of now. The problem with that image is it used at many articles and we have a free logo of the university. What I need for yall to do now is to try and not use the Gator logo as much as you guys did. As part of WP:NFCC, one of the requirements is the total usage of the image. What I can suggest, as I hinted in my restore message, is maybe use this logo at two places (main university article and also the main article about the Gators) and use the text logo for articles about the seasons, individual sports, so not only each article has some kind of image and NFCC is followed. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Notice of deletion review
Zscout, pursuant to the procedures provided at WP:DRV, I am extending you the courtesy of this notice of my intention to file a deletion review complaint against you (as well as a possible other complaint against you for failure to follow proper procedures for file deletion and possible abuse of your admin buttons). You conducted this substitution/deletion of logos in the middle of the night, with no prior notice, outside of the required process, and used your deletion of the 19 uses of the proper logo (each use having its own proper fair use rationale), and then boot-strapped a justification for the speedy deletion of the SVG file as "unused fair-use media." You are hereby notified that I will file a DRV in the event that you fail to restore "File:Florida gators logo.svg" as it existed prior to your middle-of-the-night tinkering, as well as each of its 19 prior uses on the University of Florida and Florida Gators sports team pages before 12 noon EST (5:00 p.m. GMT) today, January 4, 2011. You will note that we have extended you the courtesy of a proper notice which you failed to provide to any of the involved WikiProjects, the uploader of the subject SVG file, or any of the concerned editors.
If you believe that the 19 deleted fair use rationales for the Florida Gator head logo (i.e. "File:Florida Gators logo.svg") were improper, then I respectfully request that you restore the SVG file and its 19 pre-existing uses, and initiate the proper WP procedures for their discussion and possible deletion. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Belarus. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Belarus redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Mhiji 13:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Substantive discussion re use of File:Florida Gators logo.svg
Zscout, thank you for responding and thank you also for restoring the file and its uses while we discuss the substance of this matter.
This subject was brooked with Hammersoft last year. WikiProject University of Florida editors decided to fight for certain uses and let others slide. Accordingly, I updated the fair use rationales for the SVG Gator head logo to only include the main program page ("Florida Gators") and the individual main team pages (baseball, men's basketball, women's basketball, cross country, football, men's golf, women's golf, gymnastics, lacrosse, soccer, softball, swimming and diving, track & field, volleyball), and previously on the main University of Florida page. (The last use could easily be dispensed with.) We do not use the Gator head logo on any of the team season pages, game pages, bowl game pages, rivalry pages. In fact, we don't use any logo at all on the football season pages from 1906 to 1999, and already use the script logo on the season pages since 2000. During the last dust up over the "over use" of the logo, we agreed to stop using the Gator head logo in something like 3/4 of all prior articles. The problem is this in a nutshell: the University of Florida has 21 very successful sports teams (which are covered in something like 18 different team articles on Wikipedia, and only one of those 21 teams (football) actually uses the script logo as its secondary team emblem. The Gator head logo is the only common logo for all 21 teams. What would you propose to reduce our use of the logo? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I am familiar with Hammersoft since I worked/dealt with him over fair use images in the past (especially about college sport logos). With other schools, such as South Carolina (On a side note, my major error about replacing the Florida Gator logo with the Gamecocks logo on two pages. Uses fixed and with my comment about me being in the SEC, I am a little Hog wild this morning.), I managed to locate a sheet of logos with primary and secondary marks (and other logos/marks/images) that are used by the entire athletic program. I think I had one for Florida one or two years ago, but I need to find it on my computer again or find it again. Once I take a look at the sheet, I can see what options are even available. As you pointed out, you cut down on a lot of the uses in the past, but still about 19+ is too many in my view. While it is true that there is no hard number that an image has to stop, but if Florida does have spirit marks/logos that can be in the public domain, then it fails WP:NFCC Requirement 1 where no free image can be created or found. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Okay, let's talk turkey. The easiest use of the Gator head logo to omit is the one on the University of Florida main page; it's about the university, not the sports programs. (In fact, a lot of the sports program text could be omitted in light of the Florida Gators sport program main article.) That's one down. The football team actually uses the script logo, so maybe that's an easy sacrifice, too. That's two down. After that, it gets harder much harder because the Gator head truly is the common emblem of all 21 teams. Maybe we could use the new slant "F" for baseball and softball, which has sometimes appeared on their caps; it's unclear, however, whether this going to become a regular and readily recognizable emblem of those two teams. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Zscout, the major point, however, is that the Gator head logo is the common logo for all 21 Florida Gators teams. Using an old logo, or an uncommonly used logo on any of these main team pages is contrary to the whole point of having a common logo in the first instance. It's an immediately recognizable brand/emblem/trademark that tells WP readers that they have found a Florida Gators page. Presently, this includes 16 primary team articles on WP, plus the Florida Gators main page, for a total of 17. I have already deleted the fair use rationale for the University of Florida main page and the SVG logo from the article, reducing the total from 18 total uses (plus the file page itself, which we seem to have been including our previously overstated count of 19 uses). If we use the script Gators logo on the football page, that would reduce the total uses to 16 mainspace pages and one file page. Given, that the logo could arguably be used on well over 100 total pages (seasons, bowl games, notable games, rivalries), it seems like the UF WikiProject has already compromised a great deal on perfectly legitimate uses of the Gator head logo. And, somewhat annoyingly, your WP copyright police have a nasty habit of coming back for a second bite at the apple. Given the large representation of Florida Gators articles in WP mainspace, 16 total mainspace uses and a file page do not strike me as "too many." Otherwise, it seems that WPUF editors are being penalized for simply being more industrious than most other college fans represented on WP. Having spent some time reviewing the periodic "too many uses" lists generated by the WP copyright police (seeWikipedia:Database reports/Overused non-free files), might I suggest that you spend some time dealing with the 50+ English bus routes that are using the same non-free bus company logo? I am not being the least bit sarcastic when I suggest the Florida Gators volleyball or gymnastics team is far more notable and far more readily recognized by the Gator head logo than any of those 50-odd bus routes. Frankly, each and every one one of the Florida Gators team articles deserves to be treated as a "main article" for purposes of allocating a fair use of the logo. Why don't we both move on to a more productive use of our time? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I been using the list as you referenced as a guide to deal with the images of various types (bus routes, icons, logos, flags, you name it). I am working down the line of images to things we can replace it with or I can make my own image (as I did with the top image, which happens to be a flag). Ok, so looking at http://identity.ufl.edu/signatureSystem/ (and not being able to find a sheet for all UF spirit marks for public download) we know that the Gator head and the text are primary marks. Using, lets say, the plain "UF" for the athletic articles, while it is the easiest to do, is going to violate their trademark rules. We don't count the file page as a usage itself, so it would be 16 all together. I still think that is too much (and I see your point about having a lot of articles with sports teams) but as I mentioned before, there is no hard rule for X uses and that is it. I am going to have to see what other marks are used (perhaps have to get a UF student involved and see what can be found) before we decide on what image to settle with in the future. The main thing I am still looking at is if we are able to use public domain maybe secondary marks (as confirmed by the school) the Gator head can still be used, but just less often. NFCC #1 is still the main issue that I keep thinking about and I think it would be helpful if we get outside folks into this debate. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 19:59, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't think the issue should be reducing the amount of usages of the image, it should be reducing the amount of usages where there's a workable non-copyrighted alternative. The Gators cursive text logo is something that appears on the football helmets and in some merchandising, but it's not a good option for the other teams. To my mind the main University of Florida and Florida Gators should definitely feature the "Gator head" logo, and in my opinion, so should the articles on the individual sports (but not the seasons, players, etc.) There are quite a few of these articles, but this is only because Florida has an unusually high number of prominent sports programs, which have received quite a bit of treatment in external sources. There are very few other schools that will have this many articles (indeed even some of the Gators articles should probably be merged back into Florida Gators).--Cúchullaint/c 20:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
And until I get the mark sheet from the University of Florida (I found unofficial ones online, but they cite no sources) I do not feel comfortable making such a decision again for the UF sports articles. If you wish to merge some articles together, that can work too, but that is content you and WPUF folks can decide on. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 20:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I have the UF seal, logo and "signature" webpage bookmarked. One of my law school classmates, who is the number 2 lawyer in the UF general counsel's office, assembled the page. If you read their use restrictions on the seal, it become blazingly apparent why, for instance, the seal is not used on the University of Florida WP main page. Also, the UF logos and University of Florida "signatures" are only supposed to be used in conjunction with academic topics, not athletic subjects. And vice versa. Also, part of what you are omitting from your discussion of NFCC1 is whether the substitute is adequate under the circumstances. Clearly, using a public domain interlocking "UF" football helmet logo from 1973 is not the same as using the current primary Gator head logo. (Ironically, the WP copyright police made us delete a gallery of various text-only logos last year.) Again, using a "spirit mark" that the cheerleaders used 35 years ago, and none of the teams actually use in the present, is not the same thing. That's why they have a common athletic program logo: it's the immediately recognized emblem of all of the university's sports teams. There is no common text-only logo that all Gators teams use. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Right, and that is what I was saying earlier is using the plain UF text on sports articles is not a good idea because it will violate the wishes of UF's trademark page. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 20:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Query: Isn't drawing your own electronic SVG image of a copyrighted flag the same as using an image from an authorized source? After all, it's not the particular image (or its source), but the design that's copyrighted. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
If the flag is simple enoguh (like a star on a background) then it is public domain due to it being simple. If, in the case of some countries like Belarus, symbols are public domain once they are announced in law even if they are complex. Some other countries put flag specifications online into laws, and laws are public domain. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 20:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Arbitrary break
BTW, there's not likely to be any editorial merger of existing Gators articles. The plan is to upgrade them all and drive toward GA status for all 16 team articles in 2011. Several are already pretty far along, including the Florida Gators overview article. Besides, merging articles to get logo use approval is really putting the editorial cart in front of the horse, don't you think? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:46, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd like this entire discussion extended to the athletic articles of the University of South Carolina in which Zscout made a unilateral decision to remove the school's athletic "Block C" logo from all pages in which it has been in long-standing use, with absolutely no discussion, and then proceeded to have the page containing that image file deleted from Wikipedia. The text wordmark which has been inserted in place of the official logo is not representative of the university's athletic teams, and is in fact not used on a single uniform for any sport. Whatever consensus is reached with regard to the University of Florida's Gator head logo will be applied to USC's athletic articles as well. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 04:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
One other point bears mentioning: the script Gators logo is not "public domain." It is a validly registered trademark (R), even though it has not been copyrighted as a text-only logo. In the zealous quest to minimize the use of copyrighted, and even possibly copyrighted, images, it would seem that the WP image police have chosen to ignore the equally real problems presented by the overly free use of text-only registered trademarks. If you don't believe that Coca-Cola, for instance, won't take extraordinary legal steps to protect its text-only trademark from inappropriate use by third-parties, you would be wrong. More to the point, however, is that any unauthorized commercial use of either the Gator head logo or the script Gators logo is covered by their status as federally registered trademarks. Unauthorized sales of merchandise with the script Gators logo will land you in legal hot water, too. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
The issue of trademark usage has been discussed here many times before. The accepted standard is that Commons accepts trademarks (but not otherwise not freely licensed copyrighted works). We have {{trademark}} to cover this. As such, we are free to use them wherever editors wish to on the project. That is not the case for non-free content. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
As mentioned, trademark and copyright are two different can of worms. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 22:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Zscout, your automatic archiver is moving parts of this discussion to your archive. May I suggest that we move this discussion to the talk page of the Florida Gators main article. Frankly, this discussion needs to be preserved in one readily accessible location because it's going to need to be available to other project editors later. If GarnetAndBlack wishes, I believe that the conversation can be transcluded to the talk page for one of the South Carolina articles, too. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:United States POW-MIA flag.svg
Thank you for uploading File:United States POW-MIA flag.svg. 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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
Thanks for uploading File:Unibuss menylogo.gif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.
Hello, Zscout370. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello. Looks like you made 3 edits today: UMassMinutemen.png → MassMinutemen wordmark.svg using AWB. This has killed the UMass logo on the pages where it was used. Can you please check the SVG image you intended as a replacement? Thanks. --MikeUMA (talk) 03:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I forgot the U in UMass. That was the problem and now it is fixed. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 08:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Please restore University of South Carolina "Block C" logo
You apparently saw your way to restoring Florida's deleted logo, please do the same with USC's logo so that it may be rightfully restored to the school's main athletic article and team sport pages. Thank you. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 04:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
As I told the Florida people, we have an official secondary mark that can be used for the sports and seasons pages. The secondary logo is public domain (and was used at some articles as a JPEG version uploaded by Hammersoft). The C logo will be restored, but just like I told the UF folks, the use needs to be reduced heavily. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:59, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Garnet, just for the record, please note that the Florida project has not been using the primary Gator head logo on any page that is not the primary sports program page ("Florida Gators") or the main individual sports team pages ("Florida Gators women's golf"). We previously deleted the primary logo from all team season, bowl games, notable games and rivalry pages a year ago, as part of a previous compromise with the copyright enforcement guys. We have agreed to delete it from the main University of Florida page now (it's unnecessary there), and we will probably delete it from the Florida Gators football page now, because there is an acceptable text-only trademark available (the script "Gators" logo) that the football team actually uses as its helmet logo. Our problem is that none of the Gators sports teams other than the football team actually use the script Gators logo. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Voieres.gif
Please don't tag this file for deletion; as you can read at WP:F8, this criterion only applies to files of the same filetype. AGIF and an SVG are definitely not the same filetype. Nyttend (talk) 23:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
It is an orphaned fair use image and since it does have a replacement, then the template also asks for the replacement image. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 02:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Canadian Army insignia
Thanks for creating .svg and placing them under GDFL licences - it would be a shame lose all Canadian insignia. As you are probably more than well aware, with this edit the shoulder boards have "disappeared". Are you planning to create .svg of the shoulder boards? (To do so would be well beyond my abilities.) If not, are there any options for acquiring "free" images of the shoulder boards? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Considering that the Navy, Army and Air Force shoulder boards are the same design (with the exception for colors), I think not having the shoulder boards for right now will not be a major loss. (Plus, I an am admin so I can see the images when deleted). They will be created in due time, but my focus now is to make sure all of the basic insignia is done before I tackle the shoulder boards. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 05:49, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
"Considering that the Navy, Army and Air Force shoulder boards are the same design (with the exception for colors), I think not having the shoulder boards for right now will not be a major loss." - Not quite the point I was trying to communicate, but yes, I agree with your thought.
" ... but my focus now is to make sure all of the basic insignia is done before I tackle the shoulder boards. " - Again, not quite the point I was trying to communicate, but yes, I agree that you have your priorities in the right order.
I will do the SVG for them, but I just need time. As for where to find free images, see if someone is willing to donate images or see what Flickr has. If you want, you can take the insignia I done and make designs for the air force (using the colors from the images we got). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 06:05, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
This seems to be becoming way more complicated than I would have thought necessary.
Are you planning to create .svg of the shoulder boards? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Happy to help. What is it that you want me to do? Where do I find the list of what you've created? Pdfpdf (talk) 08:19, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
P.S. If there are any files there that I created, given that you're an admin and thus can, please just delete them - don't bother to tag them. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 08:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
(P.P.S. BTW: My email is enabled if you want a less public conversation. Pdfpdf (talk) 08:30, 8 January 2011 (UTC))
Oh dear. "She who must be obeyed" is using that tone of voice. Back soon. (I hope.) Pdfpdf (talk) 08:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
And I am in the Central US so it is nearly 3 am here. I need to sleep or my "She who must be obeyed" will raise hell. Anyways, army shoulder insignia completed today. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 08:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Because if it turns out I am wrong in the terms of licensing or design, only one project is affected. I have all of the SVG files on my computer and I can upload them to the Commons in due time using Commonist. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for getting Flag of Bhutan to GA. Maybe you would interested in getting the National Anthem and the Emblem of Bhutan to GA so we can have a Good Topic of the national symbols of Bhutan. Spongie555 (talk) 23:06, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Article National symbols of Bhutan is preety good and I plan to nominate it to GA soon if you want to help. Its currently a DYK nomination right now. Spongie555 (talk) 03:35, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Article National symbols of Bhutan could use some help and someone left some feedback in the talk page. The article was modeled after you article on national symbols of Belarus. Spongie555 (talk) 05:23, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
The article was nominated for GA. If you would like to help or watch you can. Spongie555 (talk) 02:39, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I've noticed you've deleted this page citing this discussion as the reason for doing so. Might I ask why you also choose to retain the talkpage and the remaining pages? :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 21:48, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
I forgot, but the talk page serves as a redirect. I think that is fine, unless you have other plans. I am in the process of moving into a dorm in the next few days, so if you feel it is not needed, please tag it as Speedy G7. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 22:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Indef. Full protection on Banovina of Croatia
Hi Zscout. I was looking at indef. fully protected pages to see if there are any pages that might inadvertently remain fully protected. I found Banovina of Croatia that you protected in August to stop an edit war. Looks like the war was between DIREKTOR and Ex13. DIREKTOR seemed to be trying to start a dialog through both his edit summaries as well as posts to the article's talk page. Since action seems to have died down, I was wondering if perhaps it might be possible to unprotect the page, and follow-up with blocks to warring users if needed? It's your call, but since it was a few months ago, I wanted to bring it to your attention in case it fell off your to-do list. Hope all is well!--GnoworTC 17:46, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
As I'm not an admin, if you could do the unprotect, I'd greatly appreciate it. Took this here as opposed to WP:RFPP per instruction at beginning of Unprotect section to contact protecting admin. Thanks for your swift reply!--GnoworTC 18:33, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Zscout. I've just reached out to Grutness regarding protection of South Island nationalism and would greatly appreciate your comments here. Thanks in advance! Have a great day!--GnoworTC 23:27, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
The page was protected due to a long term edit war and Grutness was involved in the edits. I am just the protecting admin who was not a part of the dispute. It would be better to ask him. (Note, if you are going through all of my protections, I am currently starting classes and finishing a dorm move in, so if other admins feel the need to unprotect and I have not said anything, go ahead and unprotect. All that I ask is that if it is tagged with OTRS, don't do it and let me deal with it. Thanks.) User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 23:49, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
No worries, Zscout. I wasn't trying to do any form of hounding of a specific user. I was working off of this list which is indefinitely fully edit protected articles at least 500 bytes or above (size limit is to avoid looking at protected redirects - for the most part). I've already notified all admins who protected pages that likely can be unprotected. I just was requesting your comment on this page, per Grut's notice that he might have had a COI on this article (which he made on the article talk page) and you were a good secondary person to go to. As such, I started the discussion on Grut's page and just notified you as well. I'll wait for Grut's follow-up. Good luck with classes!--GnoworTC 01:58, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Zach - no sooner was the edit protection lifted from the page than the problem editor came back and strated excising parts of it again. There's comments from other editors to the article on my talk page, but I suspect it's going to need edit protection again. Any chance of you doing that? Grutness...wha? 09:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to bring you back into this, Zscout. After reviewing the recent edit history, it looks like not only do we have a problematic editor, but we also have an IP that made a positive contribution. As such, indefinite protection may not be appropriate for this article. If you could contribute to the discussion here, I'd greatly appreciate it.--GnoworTC 16:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
I have no clue who to ban or whatever, but some kind of RFC could be started and the IP can make request on the talk page for placing edits. User:Zscout370 <sall>(Return Fire) 16:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
In my experience, IPs often can't find a talk page, yet alone use a template. Additionally, I'd like to request that the New Muenster Cross section that was removed here, be restored. Since that appears to have been a good faith edit by the IP. If you could restore that, I'd appreciate it.--GnoworTC 16:51, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Zscout, I am wondering what the problem is with my edit[9]. The sources used in the section only state Dunedin was suggested as a capital (this is mentioned in the History section) and New Munster was a name for the area (also mentioned in the History section). Teroamahai (talk) 01:18, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't know, you bring it to the talk page and sort it out. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 02:29, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Renewed protection discussion
Hi Zscout. I renewed my request to reduce protection on this page. I suggested that perhaps applying PC2 protection might resolve the situation. I'm not sure where policy stands regarding using this protection. As a result of an admin at WP:RFPP deferring to the protecting admin, I asked them for an opinion as to whether it's permissible to add pending changes protection. Given that they may be more familiar with where policy stands on this protection level, I would greatly appreciate your support in applying WP:PC2 if they state that adding this protection to the page is permissible. Thanks so much!--GnoworTC 17:28, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
"The pending changes trial has ended. The result of a poll was in favor of the temporary continuation of PC on most of the currently PC-protected articles until a new version is released. Please don't do anything drastic. Please don't fight. No page in the Wikipedia namespace should be protected under pending changes except those for testing." With this in mind, I did put it at PC, but at the very highest level. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 20:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
This IP is at it again, restoring the Gamecocks logo. I've reverted him, and let him know he had been reverted. He responded with an insult [10]. At some point, perhaps not yet, a block will be in order. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:38, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
And another insult [11]. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:40, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
I hadn't noticed that the IP had been blocked for extended periods before. Thanks for the block. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Image problem
Hi! I found a problem of the title and description of this image. They are incorrect. It's not a poster of Arirang (1926 film). Please take a good look at the poster. It says "故春史20回忌追悼記念作品!", "監督 脚色 金蘇東" and "南洋映画社". It's definitely a poster of the 1957 remake. See this. The nominator's claim is correct. See these too.
[12][13][14] I removed the image from the article. But someone who doesn't read ja/kanji would use it again. Can you move the file name and edit the description? I don't know what to do to solve this problem, I have an account at Commons though. Would you please do it for me? Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 15:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Still waiting on the document to come in--I guess some Ukrainian businesses are still on a holiday break. I'll let you know as soon as I get it. — Alex Khristov 22:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
What can be done about this: [15] This logo is trademarked, is based on a unique casting of a tiger's paw and thus does not meet the claims provided in the rationale for a logo made of "simple geometric shapes". GarnetAndBlack (talk) 01:10, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Actually the image is being currently reviewed by Magog the Ogre concerning some pages that GarnetAndBlack was edit-warring on. The image was altered by color, size, shape, & texture while still adhering to certain restrictions and guidelines. As with: Duke Athletic logo [16], UNC athletic logo [17], or [18]. It actually follows guidelines to the letter now, more so than the other cited examples. ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 01:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Additions to Commons may be "reviewed" by anyone. And you are certainly in no position to accuse anyone of edit-warring, as that is the sole reason why you have registered an account after edit-warring yourself using a number of IP addresses and being reported [19]. The fact that the articles you have been edit-warring in are now under protection forced you into registering an account, I bet you were shocked to find that new accounts are not allowed to immediately bypass protection. Also, did you notice anything similar about the logos you provided to support your position? They are all based on words and/or letters. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 02:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
I understand the guidelines. And I wasn't accusing you of anything, just stating some of the facts. I think everyone else is trying to be level-headed here, when any of those users you reverted (beyond 3RR) could have easily have filed the same complaint against you. Did you ever ask yourself why none did? More trouble? Maybe it's because there are editors here who actually care about the content. You have already gotten your way, & and as others continue to follow guidelines, you still seem to be... warring? Why can't we all get along here? Another well thought out suggestion. ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 03:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
I deleted the Tiger Paw logo for Clemson on the Commons; I agree that the tiger paw is in no way a "simple geometric shape" and the logo is copyrighted. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 02:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Actually, I was going to let Magog take a look at it. And it doesn't have to be one shape, as with most logos that are of mulitple shapes, or composed of simple shapes, and was enhanced to fit guidelines. How is it different than the other ones' cited. It's not. And why wasn't this looked at and "discussed" before you arbitrarily and hastily deleted someone else's work, that took alot of time, and could have been a peaceful "resolution" over pages that have been in constant dispute? ThomasC.Wolfe
The Duke logo is text only, NC is intertwined text and the Bama logo is a circle with text (I personally think that is copyrighted, but I been proved wrong on that). As for Clemson, it was not a geometric shape, it was not a simple design and enjoys copyright protection within US law. The Commons has a simple goal, which is free content, and the Clemson tiger paw is not free content in the terms of copyright. We have to speedy things like that. As for your edit wars here, it is simple: free content should be used when possible and the tiger paw isn't. I am not sure what Magog has something to do with this, but I was one of the people that Garnet suggested to ask about copyright. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 03:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to question you. The logo is 4 small ovals and a semi-oval. They don't have to be "perfect" geometric shapes or straight edges. There is nothing in legal literature about that. Now I am confused. That page you just linked is the "exact page" that the logo design came from. And the pdf was used as a template, but was altered enough to meet guidelines, color, shape, etc. I know a lot of time was put into making alternate logos to satisfy everyone, and to follow "guidelines." Did you bother to read the image sources? How are you going to fix this now??? What is your suggestion? ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 04:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Commons is different than Wikipedia and the image is non-free. Ok, so it is ovals, but it is not a basic geometric shape in the sense of a perfect oval. It won't be restored on the Commons, and File:Clemson University Tiger Paw logo.svg was uploaded. (Note: I have software to alter PDF files and make vector images of the tiger paws. I am very well aware of the image sources with regards to Clemson University; I was the one that even brought yall the text logos). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:27, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Whose "yall"? Nice humor, sorry, been fighting off most likely "vipernerd" or his brother for the past few days, always an issue on these pages. Always. That's why nothing ever gets resolved. Ok, it doesn't have to be a perfect geometric shape, that's not specified within legal language. And altered versions of the the same logos have been used for other schools & sports teams, like high schools that use a paw logo. Look, if someone can take the exact same color and insignia logo for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, not even bother to change the color of the logo, or shape of the logo, keep it exactly the same, and then edit out the "r" as it's copyright, then post it on wikicommons, how would that be correct. It would be following guidelines less than I did. So, how did other schools logos end up getting used, like Alabama's which is even more colors and shapes than 4 semi-ovals? Florida's logo? That's a simple shape? ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 04:44, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Yall=The site. I am going to address each issue. 1. Wikipedia is a lot different than John Doe High School. It happens a lot, so that is true. But the question is would a college (or a pro team) be upset if their logo was used by another school? 99% of the time would be no. Wikipedia, we are bigger (and more well known) than these schools, so we have to pay attention to our licensing, image use, etc. 2. I pointed out the derivative works issue on your talk page, we deal with that on a case by case basis. So in the case of the NC logo, we generally will mark image pages as trademarked (so the R) is taken care of. I personally keep the R in the images, some don't, but that is something that can be fixed easily (and probably needs more advice from our legal team). 3. The Bama logo I feel is copyrighted, but not sure why it was licensed PD. But I remember seeing legal text saying that the combination of text and circle is not creative of itself to enjoy copyright. Florida's Gator logo is actually under copyright status (like the Tiger Paw) and while it is used on a lot of pages (I dealt with that issue before), there is really no free alternative that I could find yet. Sure, there is a few text logos used by the specific sports, but I have not been able to look at the official logo sheets to see what is good to use. (Plus, you have an army of editors, which is always a problem when dealing with image issues). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 05:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
That's why I was trying to get Magog to take a look at this stuff before you got pulled in as some sabotage ploy. Tried to tell you. Least you know now. We need speaker phones. ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 06:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Sabotage is the least of my concerns. Plus, according to his own userpage, Magog only admins here. I admin at the Commons and here so I can directly deal with the tiger paw image at the Commons. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 13:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Re: User:129.252.69.40
Question. If user 129.252.69.40 is also Vipernerd, is 129.252.69.40 also GarnetAndBlack?
Their history pages on edits and re-verts are almost identical.
If this user wasn't so combative about every issue on rivalry sports pages, and logos, I wouldn't have noticed. ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 04:10, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
No, I am neither the anonymous IP (you have some familiarity with anonymous IP editing, hmm?) nor Vipernerd. And you are flirting dangerously with pushing the limits of WP:HARASS, WP:NPA, and WP:AGF. You are starting to seriously look like a person who has come to Wikipedia with a personal agenda and an axe to grind. I suggest you find more constructive ways to spend your time here. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 04:21, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Needs semi. PC is a waste of space; not approved by the community, and inappropriate in cases like this. Or most cases, really.
IMHO, YMMV. But I had to say it. Chzz ► 00:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
It was either PC or full admin lock, and either way, I would have been shafted for each decision. I am familiar that PC should not be used often, but good to stop the initial tide. (Plus, it was at semi before I went to PC). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 00:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Semi only had 3 mins [25], and I think all the vandalism was unconfirmed users, except Anonymousone87 (talk·contribs) - so I'd rather have seen one block than PC.
I understand the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" though. Chzz ► 00:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I would rarher try not and block folks this time, unlike what I did with the US flag article about a week ago. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 01:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Nods. Anyways, I would still debate with you any day of the week than some of the folks I have dealt with in the past. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 01:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Image source clarification
Hey, Zscout, I was wondering if you could resolve some confusion about File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg. Did you completely create it? If so, this particular image is not protected by copyright; the licensing should look like this or this. A coat of arms isn't like a logo; any CoA can be replicated by anyone. I'm doing a GA review on Queen Elizabeth II, and this is the most pressing matter that needs to be resolved, which is why I'm contacting you now. Please release the image under a license of you choice (you originally released it into the public domain, which was completely legitimate). I can give you further information regarding the details on request, but in a nutshell, you can recreate coats of arms and release them according to your preferences, without needing a fair use rationale. SwarmX 13:54, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
The problem is that this specific revision of the coat of arms was done in 1994, so any version I would do is a derivative work and is protected by Canadian Crown Copyright. It was sent to the Commons before, but because of that issue, it has to be licensed this way. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 16:05, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid I don't understand. The year it was created is unimportant because we're not arguing expired copyright. The important question is did you create this?
See Commons:Coat of Arms - "The main problem with CoA is not to upload private (copyrighted) images "found on the net", but CoA drawn afresh are OK." "...a CoA can be freely drawn after a model (without involving derivative rights), but a given picture "found on the internet" cannot be uploaded: it must be redrawn. Indeed, if someone makes a .svg translation of a .jpg original drawing, it is a copyvio..."
If it was taken from another site and converted .svg, it's doesn't qualify for fair use because it is replaceable (anyone can make a reproduction). If it's a reproduction, created by you, it's not copyrighted. Commons took it off because someone added fair use information. I'm saying they were wrong to do so in the first place. Either way, something is wrong. SwarmX 17:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
It was a faithful reproduction of the 1994 arms produced by the Government of Canada, so copyrighted. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Er...what? I just explained why it wouldn't be copyrighted. Hell, ignore me and read Coats of Arms, we're both saying the same thing. If this is the rare exception, please explain that to me so I'm not wasting my time, but as far as I can tell this image isn't considered copyrighted under US law. SwarmX 20:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
But the work is not PD in its source country, so has to stay here and as fair use. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 20:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Korea medal
Thanks for the explanation. Now that I understand, I agree with you. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thank you for the cleanup and the heads-up! Any more of these at Emblems of Indian states you care to tackle would be appreciated.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 05:33, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I am just picking and choosing the images I am working on. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 05:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Coat of Arms of Canada
Hi Zscout370,
Can't say I haven't thought about it before, but the copyright issue scares me a little. I don't want to spend time creating an image that will get deleted because it violates the copyright. Plus even if I make some derivatives to it I might get some slack for it not looking like the original. The COA of Canada is very specific and has very few examples of variation, this could pose some future problems. The COA of Australia has the same issue, which made me abandoned it after starting work on it early last year. So if we could find someone who could be sure about this, I will probably be more willing to start work on it.
I'm really sorry for being this timid, I wish I could get excited and jump right on it. But a lot of my work have been causing some 'style' problems with some users lately and I just want to be sure. Sodacan (talk) 13:38, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
It won't be deleted, but the license will be changed. I am trying to get different Canadian views on the image and see what can be done, but I believe any attempt to make it free would be good. But I thank you for your reply and really appreciate what you do. (I might ask you some things about Thai related items with flags, but I am not sure what you are able to do.) User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 15:50, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I agree, it's a shame that the image is not free. I will be very eager to hear what the others are saying. And please ask me about some Thai stuff, I haven't done anything on that front for a while. Sodacan (talk) 19:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I was going to see if you were able to get some documents from Thailand related to the design and colors of the Thailand flag. I will provide the source material later on today. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 19:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I am not currently in Thailand, so might not be able to get any documents. However the article in Thai wiki is quite good and extensive so I will check there, plus there should be something in the Royal Thai Government Gazette, everything is in pdf and online, but in Thai of course. Sodacan (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
According to http://app.tisi.go.th/work_prg/stage2e.html "982 Technical specification for Thai national flag standard colour" and "980 The national flag of Thailand" are in the works. If you can help me obtain those documents, that will be helpful. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 00:42, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
If they are on the net I will try, I will also make a request at the Thai wiki- there is a user there who is a Thai flag expert. Will get back to you soon. Sodacan (talk) 18:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Regarding tpi.wikipedia.org & your application for Global Admin at meta.
Following contact on your application, and the reply received from Steward Kylu, I am writing to ask you per this link to abstain from any and all duties relating to Global Administration at the Tok Pisin Wikipedia. This request is made primarily due to your wishes as expressed in your nomination, and made on behalf of the community of the Tok Pisin Wikipedia. BarkingFish 01:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
I will not perform any activity on tpi.wikipedia with regards to images in the capacity as global admin. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 01:54, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Chinese flag
Hi Zscout370! I've left my message concerning about the Chinese national flag here. Andyso (talk) 07:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello Zscout370, I saw that you deleted a photo I had uploaded a couple weeks ago because I found it on Flickr. After I found it, I contacted the original author of the photograph who gave me permission to use it. I'm not sure if his permission makes the photo allowable, but I forwarded the email he sent to the address specified in the instructions. Would that photo (datsik_spinning_live.jpg) be able to be undeleted? Thanks either way.Schrute058 (talk)
I got the email. However, the email that you sent does not have enough permission for us to use. The Flickr image is also under full copyright, not under Creative Commons. The guy needs to change the Flickr image to a free license. I will send you more information. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 01:40, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Thank you for the other day. Please take a look at this image. See the meaningless imprint of a seal. "Yellow comfort"! Some editors might mistake it as the genuine signature and the seal of Hirohito. I think the image should be deleted. What do you think? Oda Mari (talk) 10:05, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
<use id="Alpha_Canis_Majoris" xlink:href="#star1" transform="translate(-535,177)"/>. The star size is right. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 13:13, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of March. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 50. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 23:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Correction on the national flag of Macedonia
hello zscout, there are some details to correct in the Macedonian flag. The diagonal rays are too thin near the sun. On the other side, the two vertical rays are a little bit too thick than they should be. Could you correct them according to the sources you have used the last time you corrected the file?
Thanks for your precise work, but the diagonal rays have to be corrected also, as i explained above. could you fix them too?93.219.244.98 (talk) 07:04, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't know what your email address is and neither do I know what I'm supposed to say. Fry clearly doens't enjoy discussion, so he uploaded File:Coat of Arms of the Bagrationi Dynasty (original).svg (including the typo in the motto that I noted) instead - which he probably over time will introduce in every related Wikipedia article, like a silent ninja without edit summaries as far as I know him. - SSJt 12:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
All you have to do is click "Email this user" at the left side of your page, and it will allow you to email users. Anyways, this is not the first (not the last) issue that I ever had directly conflict with him on or had to mediate. I do admit that it is a radical change from the previous version, but sometimes things will improve. I had that problem before that one user wants the older images, even though 10 want the newer one. I would still suggest to turn the greyish into white, to match the official images that I found, but that is about it. I cannot speak for the accuracy for the motto, so that is something I will need to research. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 19:18, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Ah, alright. I asked about the motto here. I'm not dead set in favour of grey instead of white, so I'll see what I can do. But like I said in the discussion, I don't see any justification for the made-up argument that a rendering of a coat of arms is "better" or "more accurate" if it somehow has a look that is more similar to another interpretation (i.e. e.g. the version shown on the website of the royal house). The original blazoning is the only thing that absolutely has to be followed. There is a tradition to allow for the use of a literal silver type colour (grey) where the blazoning says argent, for instance seen in this interpretation of the Luxembourgian coat of arms and this interpretation of the coat of arms of Austria-Hungary. - SSJt 20:42, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
With the Luxembourg arms, the law does show a silver tint where white would normally be (while this is not the case for the naval flag, but the law is the law) and I do not dispute that. Fry would, but I tend to be more legalistic when it comes to coat of arms. I tend to follow what government guides say about the colors. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 22:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Louisiana Monroe Warhawks workmark.svg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Louisiana Monroe Warhawks workmark.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --B (talk) 02:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
UA Flag Standard
Got it! Check your email for more info... — Alex Khristov 03:45, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
The problem is that NewFreeSpeechFlag.svg and the file you uploaded are about the PS3 code; this one is about the HD DVD key. Until we know for sure about the PS3 one, we need to have those deleted for the time being. We already have the HD DVD key resolved years ago. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 22:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
thank you very much for your insights into this case. ( i refer to Media copyright questions ) i would appreciate any pointers as to where i can find links to old discussions, etc. thanks again. Decora (talk) 17:27, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
I have been keeping an eye on that. I am not able to find anything right now, but I would suggest to look at the article we have on the HD DVD key. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 19:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
deletion request of Arnold Zamora
thank you! it has been deleted. Pinay (talk•email) 02:15, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
that was a speedy reply to the request. and took only 8 day? gracias.Pinay (talk•email) 02:21, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
There is a lot of admins that deal with AFD due to the sheer size of it. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 02:25, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Ukrainian flag (again)
Hey, after studying the standard a bit closer, one thing confuses me... according to the standard, the Pantone colors are okay for print and certain types of paints, but not for cloth flags. The part that confuses me is that they refer to a color that they call "C3". The reason this confuses me is because they refer to it as one color, but the Ukrainian flag has two colors. The Yxy chart they provide is also just a range. I wonder if the more specific color is in the other DSTU (4513), or if they're just referring to a "white" color specification before the cloth is dyed. — Alex Khristov 17:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
I noticed you are the last person updated the flag. This flag is the incorrect and fake flag of Afghanistan.
Afghanistan's flag does not have any christian cross or any other type of cross. Here is the official flag of Afghanistan: http://nawjawanan.com/flag/
There are crosses in the Afghanistan flag, but not the Christian cross. What was supposed to happen was there is supposed to be an arm on the bottom half, almost like a window. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello Zscout,
I have left you a message at it:user talk:Zscout370 to explain a few things about your AWB edits there. I hope that solves your problem. Anyway, thank you for your edits. Greetings, --Austroungarika scold or call 18:32, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect E Mare Libertas. Since you had some involvement with the E Mare Libertas redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Horologium(talk) 22:58, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I decided to G7 the page, because I am an author and I agree with the RFD. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 00:09, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to take part in a study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 01:27, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Help
Could you make this flag, File:Finlad kingdome 800.jpg, into a svg? I requested it on the graphics lab but it got no responses for a week now. I saw you are good at making flags into svg so I thought you could help. Spongie555 (talk) 08:07, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the svg. It's way better then the svg the graphics lab gave me(they started to work on it after I asked you). Spongie555 (talk) 00:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Is there any reason that these file names cannot be changed? The current names are misleading. Oda Mari (talk) 05:14, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
It mostly because I just have not looked at the issue. I would suggest taking it to another Commons admin. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 12:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I see. I'll ask someone at Commons. Best regards. Oda Mari (talk) 15:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Selma's Choice.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Selma's Choice.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Nice flag!
Your SVG of the Finnish flag Flag_of_the_Kingdom_of_Finland_(1918-1919).svg is really nicely done! Jon C (talk) 23:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Zscout370. You have new messages at Crazymonkey1123's talk page. Message added 03:57, 3 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hye, can you change the size of this flag → from 896 × 448 pixels(current) to 1,235 × 650 pixels ??, the reason is because the current size is to small than the other flag like US flag, Brazil flag and etc. → ,
Hope you can change it, thanks. DarknessVisitor (talk) 04:52, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
I kept it at that size due to construction details, but with vector images they can be scaled to any size on the Wiki. Having a larger file is, in my view, not needed. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:55, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Ouw, never mind, thanks for the information =)) DarknessVisitor (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Article 14 item b of the Indonesia Copyright Law No 19, 2002:
There shall be no infringement of Copyright for:
publication and/or reproduction of the symbol of the State and the national anthem in accordance with their original nature;
publication and/or reproduction of anything which is published by and/or behalf of the Government, except if the Copyright is declared to be protected by law or regulation or by statement on the work itself or at the time the work is published; or
repetition, either in whole or in part, of news from a news agency, broadcasting organization, and newspaper or any other sources, provided that the source thereof shall be fully cited
The only issue is thus whether later works by Bank Indonesia are "by and/or on behalf of the Government". By, probably not; on behalf of, almost certainly. Jpatokal (talk) 03:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
There is no infringement (or claims of misuse of copyright) but there is protection, since the section above this one states what cannot even receive copyright protection. It might be an issue of what term was used, but I still believe images of Indonesian currency are protected by copyright. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 16:01, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Featured sounds was booming with activity in the March/April period, ideally that should be all the time. FS has been a battleground at times, however, it is my hope that that is in the past. I ask you all to reconsider your positions and set aside the differences you may have had with other participants for the good of the project and encyclopedia. Don't let FS become like VP, it is a path that a featured process should traverse. You were sent this message because you are listed at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Contributors or have been a past contributor.
Hello, Zscout370! I was wondering if you could make images of the RCAirC ranks and have it look similar to the Air Force versions like the one your made on the right. I don't know how to make SVG images, and seeing that you already have experience in making rank images, I thought might as well ask you! Rank images are here. Hope you're ok with this... --K.Annoyomous(talk) 06:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Zscout, you made an impressive contribution to Wikipedia. I also noticed the featured articles you have contributed to. Would you be interested in helping me to get Azerbaijan article a featured status? I have been working for a while now, I would very much appreciate your help. Please let me know. Neftchi (talk) 21:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
The construction sheet of the document you mention is already in Wiki. See here. I added this as a thumb picture to the headline. Neftchi (talk) 19:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
The modern flag of Azerbaijan was established in 1918. I found the related historic document on tthis issue [28]. Is this helpful? Neftchi (talk) 19:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I understand what you mean and I will try to get a hold of that document. In the meantime we could further improve other parts of the article. Your latest contributions on May 28, are very good. I think we need to expand the Soviet Azerbaijan flag part. I think we should continue this discussion on the proper page here. Neftchi (talk) 21:31, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Scout, could you perhaps take a look at the writing of sources in the Flag of Azerbaijan page. This needs to be properly written and Im not good at this. Please let me know in the discussion page of the article. Neftchi (talk) 07:59, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Some of the edits were fine, such as changing of the photo (because of licensing issues) but I would suggest to take it to ANI. I do not have time to be able to focus on this issue fully. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 18:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, would you happen to have enough information for OTRS for this file? I was looking at copying it to Commons perhaps. (your name was on the talkpage) Thanks. Deadstar (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
No OTRS information was ever filed. I am not sure if I was even on OTRS at that time (or heard of it). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 16:22, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Probably not - it's an old one. Not to worry. Is there a way to remove the move to commons template without it getting tagged automatically again? Deadstar (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
The width is described as "3", and the circle's diameter is described as "3/5", but there is simply no way that that diameter is one fifth of the flag's width. It's simply too large to be only one 5th.
The 3/5 is for the length of 2. So 2 X (3/5) gets you the diameter of the sun. This is how the flag is described in the law. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I do not know japanese and the google and babel fish translations were unclear. If the diameter is supposed to be 3 fifths of the flag height, then the number should read 6/5, which is 2*3/5. If the diameter is supposed to be 3 fifths of the flag length, then the number should read 9/5, which is 3*3/5. As is stands now, the number 3/5 or 0.6 means that the diameter is 0.3 of the height (0.6/2) or 0.2 of the length (0.6/3). DrZygote214 (talk) 21:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I changed the image to where the 3/5th is supposed to measure, but you are supposed to take the length of the flag, then times it by the result of 3/5 (so 2 x 0.6). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:47, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Walt Winston
You may be mildly amused by the ridiculous legal threats being made at User_talk:Walteriarecords. Indeed you have probably received a similar e-mail. But I would like to know why you deleted Walt Winston. I see no discussion or speedy tag and you must admit that "2011061410011831 OTRS" as a deletion reason is, to put it mildly, somewhat cryptic. — RHaworth(talk·contribs) 10:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi Zscout: (since I'm not too good at these myself), do you think you could vectorize File:LanfgleyTS-flag.png (most likely unfree) from the elements I found in [29]? Thanks! Connormah (talk) 03:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Good job, thanks! Also, once you get around to attempting to fix the Maricopa one - would you also mind giving me an idea of what I'm doing wrong? This isn't the first time this has happened. Connormah (talk) 16:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Guess I should look before I write, thanks for the fix as well. Connormah (talk) 16:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Can you also do a fix to File:Buffalo Seal.svg, one of my (visibly) earlier and first attempts at SVG files? This is what it should look like. Thanks again. Connormah (talk) 01:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
The Original Barnstar
For your willingness to assist in a pinch. Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 18:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Coat of arms of Singapore.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Coat of arms of Singapore.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:37, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Coat of arms of Singapore.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Coat of arms of Singapore.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:15, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Non-Free rationale for File:Nueva Alianza logo.png
If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:49, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Walt Winston
You deleted the Walt Winston article as a result of e-mail/s received and recorded in the OTRS system. You are not allowed to discuss further. Why on earth did it need an e-mail to tell me that? Perhaps I am nit-picking but I still think your deletion log entries could have been clearer - look at these log entries for example. In the case of Walt Winston and the associated image a deletion log entry of "Deletion request received via OTRS:2011061410011831" would have been sufficient to prevent me bothering you. — RHaworth(talk·contribs) 23:28, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Please explain the license change on this image, as the uploader's complained on my tlak page when asked for an FUR. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I guess the image license states it is a non-commercial image now, so it has to have a FUR. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 06:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Rothe Gertrud.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Rothe Gertrud.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:54, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PilotOfficer.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. –Drilnoth (T/C) 10:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
A vandal has repeatedly edited the Harold Covington article with false information claiming he was in the Rhodesian Military. The source that cites this says that he was not.
Edit - The discussion page for this article has been repeatedly vandalized as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.11.81 (talk) 18:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you for deciding to unblock me , I am very greatful and i hope i will be able to improve and contribute to Wikipedia; however, What is happening about the "adoption" process? Goldblooded (talk) 21:21, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
I usually skip the formalities and start the adoption/mentoring process once you said "I accept." So what are the main articles you tend to work on? User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 21:25, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Could you tell me what exactly is a wikipedia adoption?
And of course ill be happy to work with you , I have a deep interest and passion in History , i am actually writing a biography about Pétain, i might actually go ahead and possibly get it published if all goes well.
Ive also made a dictionary of all the prominent politicians , generals and soldiers from the Axis powers in WW2. My area is modern history , 19th and 20th Centuries, paticulary European history and i also have an interest in politics (im a member of the conservative party) -Dont groan lol. Goldblooded (talk) 21:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Then you will be in very good company. I am a history buff and I study politics as my university major. From what I experienced on Wikipedia (and I been here since 2004), adoption is where one older user decides to mentor another user when it comes to editing, answering overall questions about Wikipedia as a whole. While some mentors do just that, others become heavily involved with their mentorees and solve their overall editing disputes. There is no set guidelines or rules, but even if there were, I usually tend to ignore those things and do things my way. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 21:34, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Sounds good. By the way is it possible to change the name of an article?
Concerning article titles, yes, we can change titles. See WP:MOVE for more details. Concerning your draft, our manual of style should be applied to it. After you do that, it might be ready for the article namespace.Jasper Deng(talk) 01:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
I saw that. Mostly it is railing about you being Chinese dealing with this article leaving a POV tag in place. I personally have no problems with what was done (I am sure if I did someone, people would have cited my Japanese connections as a POV issue). User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Template
Is there some kind of list of templates i can use for my user page? Goldblooded (talk) 11:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Oh and also is there a way to see how many contributions you have made? Goldblooded (talk) 11:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
If you want other examples of WP articles to see how we usually treat them, name-wise, the easiest place to look is Category:Disputed islands. I think you'll find that the Liancourt Rocks "compromise" is actually the exception, rather than the rule, of how we treat such islands. However, I haven't looked at all of them, so it's possible that my initial scanning impression is wrong. You may get more specific results through a systematic search. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:22, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Could you plz restore old versions of template from deleted history for historic purposes? As it was made on Commons and in Ru-wiki. Alex Spade (talk) 19:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I remember seeing Money No Enough on the copyeditors page, but I will try and look at it soon. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
I appreciate your administrative action on Libya. Hopefully this content dispute can be resolved more peaceably with the page under protection. -Kudzu1 (talk) 06:30, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
There are 2 separate arguments being debated/contended there. I hope that fact will not be lost in searching for the resolution. They both need to be agreed upon. One is the use of the term 'Libyan Republic' and the other is about the infobox(es). Kudzu1 seems to think that those two issues are inter-dependable, that a solution for one resolves the other. But there is no justification for such a view. I propose that the debate for them is separated and I will start another topic on the Talk:Libya page, 'The Infobox' albert humbert (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I'm done with this. Check my talk page for the list of edit recommendations that were impossible to put into the article itself. Let me know when you're done so I can take the article off of the Requests page thanks.--Aichikawa (talk) 15:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Re: SEPTA images
Thanks for the Flickr link. I haven't uploaded too many SEPTA images, but I'll definitely check Flickr for anything in the future. I left a message at User:Oanabay04's user page about his non-free image uploads. The user seemed to have been under the impression that it is acceptable to remove FfD tags from file pages and that uploading non-free images is perfectly fine as long as the image is historical and/or cannot be reproduced. Maybe you can give some additional input. There's also a third image on the FfD page that the user uploaded (right above the two others that have been deleted) and you could also take a look at. Thanks. –Dream out loud (talk) 21:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I have been the one deleting them, so this is why I gave you and another user a link to the free images. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 01:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Re: Japanophile
Hello Zscout370, I wonder if you are still willing to give some help on that disputed page or pages. Although there were some discussions regarding "Pinnacle Islands" as you proposed, those were not very formal and were also interrupted. If you can give some help, may I suggest that you raise a formal proposal (say, starting a new section) of this on that talk page? Thanks, nice weekend. --Lvhis (talk) 23:04, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
I am a little tied up right now, but I will give it a formal proposal in the next week. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 02:02, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Will be good, thanks.--Lvhis (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay it was not misplaced
i am not sure why you would
think that
i will now attempt to revert your
revert,
please do NOT atemmpt to revert my revert of yor revert
--Rancalred (talk) 20:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I went bold, changed {{IDGov}} to the one from Commons and then noticed your edits
[31]. It is inconvenient to have non-uniform templates between Commons and en.wiki, and we usually follow Commons in international image copyright policies. Thus I thought any changes to this template should be discussed at Commons first. Frankly, I also did not understand the old text [32] which seemed self-contradictory to me. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 00:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Because the Commons got it wrong. "There shall be no infringement of Copyright" does not mean public domain; it just means they won't sue us. The problem is that even though we tell people constantly that above statement, people just think they won't sue us will mean public domain. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 02:50, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand that. It seems to me that "There shall be no infringement of Copyright" means that reproduction does not constitute infringement of copyright, not that it does constitute infringement, but the copyright owners will waive their right to sue us. You are right in saying that allowing "publication and/or reproduction of the symbol of the State and the national anthem in accordance with their original nature" is not the same as placing it in the public domain, since "in accordance with their original nature" is presumably intended to imply some restrictions on the use of the material, and likewise "repetition, either in whole or in part, of news from a news agency, broadcasting organization, and newspaper or any other sources, provided that the source thereof shall be fully cited" does not make it public domain, because of the requirement to cite the source, but I don't see how "it just means they won't sue us" can be considered valid: it goes further than that. Furthermore, "publication and/or reproduction of anything which is published by and/or behalf of the Government, except if the Copyright is declared to be protected by law or regulation or by statement on the work itself or at the time the work is published" does appear to place the material into the public domain, as no restrictions at all are imposed on use of the material. However, even if you can give some reason why that case is not accurately characterised as "public domain", at the most I see a justification for removing the words "public domain" from the template, not for deleting it entirely. Can you clarify your reasons? JamesBWatson (talk) 14:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
The most I can think of is copyrighted free use, but there was only, I think, 7 images with this template and I relicensed the images as fair use. Since it was a copyright template that it I imagined will get no use, plus if the Commons believes it is free, the images can be uploaded there. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 16:44, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Su-33 Russian-->English translations
Greetings from the land Down Under! A few weeks ago we had a chat about the accidents regarding the Su-33. The Russian article covers a number of cases that aren't documented on the English version. Since you have some command of Russian (I assume), do you mind translating the text? Cheers, and God bless! Sp33dyphil"Adastra" 07:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Singapore has a lot of POV issues, even without this problem. I been keeping an eye on this article for a few years, but I do not know much about the country itself. I think the article needs a going over, but not sure how it could be done. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:07, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
If it helps, I put Belarus as an FA years ago, so I know exactly what needs to go into country articles. I think we might need to start from scratch. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:26, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
I move back into my dorm on Monday, then got rush to deal with, so September sounds good. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:39, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
I want to see this article unprotected as soon as possible, so other editors can work on it. I'm planning a peer review of this article sooner or later (I'm doing sulfur now - look here - you are invited to comment), but the article is protected in the first place, so how can I edit? I'm a native Singaporean, and I believe that page should never be protected. FREYWA 08:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
The page was locked to stop the edit wars but also to avoid blocking people because I had no clue who is at fault. As for the unlocking, I am going to say no for right now, so what I can suggest is to take a copy of the page and put it in your userspace to make the edits you need. I am moving to university in the next few days, so I will be busy and be away. I would say an unlock will happen within the next week. 09:49, 22 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.57.174 (talk)
Parkland College
I am trying to find out why the page for Parkland College in Champaign, IL was deleted and how it can be brought back.Drewrennick (talk) 16:36, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
It was deleted for copyright violations; the article can be recreated, but I cannot give out any deleted edits due to it. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 16:41, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to see the AfD and proof of copyright violations on that page. Justinm1978 (talk) 17:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
No AFD is required for copyright violations; see the link I posted in the deletion log. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 19:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Zscout370. You have new messages at Guerillero's talk page. Message added 19:11, 23 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thank you for reviewing the article. Is there a way of reposting the page and letting me edit to be more informational? Once I edit, can you re-review to ensure that it is "wiki appropriate"? As I mentioned, I am new to Wiki and trying to figure out all of the rules. Any help would be greatly appreciated!! (Dhouston119 (talk) 20:07, 23 August 2011 (UTC))
In response to following post:
Can you please advice as to why you deleted my page as spam? (17:26, 5 August 2011 DragonflySixtyseven (talk | contribs) deleted "AiMatch" (spam)) Why would it be classified as spam and why just delete versus trying to assist if something was incomplete or invalid? I am new to Wiki. (Dhouston119 (talk) 12:36, 23 August 2011 (UTC))
Dragonfly asked me to look at the article on his behalf; from looking at it, you had a good idea of what to do in a Wikipedia article, but the article is very promotional in tone and trying to earn more clients than being informational. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:16, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Question
Hey again , with a bit of help from Jasper i found out where the templates for user boxes were and how to use them , But do you know how to sort them out in a ordely mannere or any templates that will do so , Because if you look at my User page it looks a little jumbled, How do i sort them out? Goldblooded (talk) 21:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
So its eligble enough for wikipedia? Also, what did it mean about the image tag or something? Goldblooded (talk) 19:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
It had a rationale, but no license. I went ahead and fixed it for you. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 21:11, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks :) so is it fit for use? Its avaible from the archives and i think you can find it online as well. Goldblooded (talk) 21:28, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
War in The North Copyrighted Material
Mind telling me what was "copyrighted" before you went and locked the page? --Comesloaone (talk) 11:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Then I suggest you recheck my edit because I changed the character section with my own words. --Comesloaone (talk) 12:43, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I did but there was still sentences lifted from that site. Generally, if something is removed for copyright issues, don't restore the whole thing. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 21:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
It is my understanding that it was the character's section which was copyrighted. I redid the whole character section and you can Google all the sentences there too and you will get no results. If I have to give permission for my own words to be used, then you have permission. There's no copyright on my words and I don't think there was a copyright on the words of those forum members either. --Comesloaone (talk) 23:05, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay. That's cool if you can rewrite them. --Comesloaone (talk) 17:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Think you can unlock the War in The North article? After all, you haven't rewrote the sentences when I can. --Comesloaone (talk) 12:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Bad AWB edits
You have recently changed a few dozen pages from {{flagicon|Libya}} → {{flag|Libya|1977}}. You'll need to repair those edits, since {{flag}} also renders the country name and not just the icon. — Andrwsc (talk·contribs) 03:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Give me a moment, I will fix those. Trying to get the 1977 flag to display before the Commons switches over to the NTC flag. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:19, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
I've already updated several hundred pages, doing precisely that task. ;) You'll have to manually check your recent edits, as I've updated some of those articles in the meantime. Thanks — Andrwsc (talk·contribs) 04:38, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
That is what I did. I think I got them all that you mentioned, but with all of these templates, it is always hard to get the right ones. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:45, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Definitely! I'm essentially inspecting ~3000 pages manually to make these edits. About 1200 left on my article list... — Andrwsc (talk·contribs) 04:56, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Third Opinion
Do you think that a user was right to removed the flags in this article?
It's an offshoot of a problem that was most evident in human and animal longevity articles. The most relevant sections are here and here. One issue with using flags is that they can be misleading. For example, read the sentence, "Hideki Matsui is a baseball player in the United States"; true, but Matsui is and considers himself Japanese. He only plays in the US because we have better baseball, he doesn't refer to himself as an American; sticking an American flag next to his name could lead people to think that he now considers himself to be an American. Similar things can happen with war veterans; Ernest Hemingway fought in the Spanish Civil War with Spanish forces, but was himself American. The other issue, which is far more pointed in longevity articles but still an issue here, is that nationality isn't always important. In the case of (just for fun) the war between the Red and White armies in the USSR, it doesn't really matter whether the White Army soldier was British, Russian, or American, it's more important to emphasize that the soldier fought for the Mensheviks. A final small point that's worth noting is that flag icons take up a considerable amount of bandwidth because they're transcluded onto pages; the List of living supercentenarians article, before all the flag icons were removed, took my computer a lot longer to load than it does now. Even though we aren't usually supposed to worry about performance, one of the exceptions is if you notice a change, and you can confirm that it's something specific causing it. I hope that helps.
However mine was that if i put the flags as allegience instead of birthplace , and stating the point that its the country they fought and served for and they still have the flags in the WW1 veterans page and state them as allegience ; even flagbio states that you are allowed to add flag icons to make it more clearer and even more so since its a large list and its also easier to sort and since im pretty much the only person actually bothering to edit that article i dont know why he should get preference nor do i know what gives one editor the right to change it on the ww2 paage and when i changed it back and instead of birthplace i changed it to allegience he reverted it back again (Note that this was a couple of weeks ago but it stills relevant because it hasnt been resolved) and he also got quite irritable. Goldblooded (talk) 20:10, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
So do you think i should tell the editor involved and change the page or should i ask another persons opinion just to make sure? Goldblooded (talk) 20:44, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Flag icons may be relevant in some subject areas, where the subject actually represents that country, government, or nationality - such as military units, government officials, or national sports teams. In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when the nationality of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself.
And also the fact that it is on the WW1 version? Goldblooded (talk) 09:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Well you know what im just going to forget about the whole thing. Anyway im going to try and get this artcle [33] finished by the end of the week :)Any help is much appreciated. Goldblooded (talk) 22:36, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia, especially Singapore-related articles! I have written an article about Pathlight School, a Singaporean special school for autistic children, and am aiming to make it Wikipedia's first GA pertaining to special education. You are invited to comment at its ongoing peer review; any and all constructive feedback would be most appreciated. All the best in all your endeavours! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 03:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Whos in the wrong?
Hey scout sorry to bother you again but i need your better judgement again.
Basicially i made two posts to Dapi89's page and they were good faith edits and i was responding to a couple of peoples queries abotu what happened to him on the page etc. This is what i said.
Im afriad people move on see Wikipedia:VOLUNTEER and Wikipedia:Retiring From what i gather/believe Dapi had a dispute with one or more administrators which eventually led to him being banned for a week or so. Wikipedia:Banning_policy Although at any rate, he decided to retire due to personal problems/stress. It happens. We'll all experience it from time to time. Theres plenty of other editors anyway, if you want some advice or any quieries/questions regarding modern history (i.e ,1900-1982 although i do know a fair bit about the Napoleonic wars and the german and italian unifcation wars in the 1800s) Then im the guy to ask. Goldblooded (talk) 01:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
And the other thing i said was:
Give the guy a break, See WP:VOLUNTEER If he doesn't want to come back then he wont, If he does then he'll come back of his own accord; by the sounds of things he seemed rather stressed and worn out and moaning at him isn't going to help. Goldblooded (talk) 01:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Both of them were clearly Good WP:Faith edis I was helping out that guy out and directing him to the relevant pages ,Besides i found it unfair that everyone is moaning at dapi to come back, hes probably having a hard time; something that i know all to well myself.
I asked both admins who seem to have some sort of alliance between themeselves and a few others and they didnt give me a clear reply , at fist Ed removed both edits and said (in the chat history thing)
"rm post, people are allowed to put posts like that on this page, no need to attack them"
Which doesnt really make any sense because i honestly dont see how explaining what happened and putting myself forward to help them has anything remotely to do with "personal attacks"
Concerning the other paragraph i was pointing out that if hes gunna come back he'll do it if not he wont , moaning at him wont help. And it wont either.
Its also ironic how they seemd to get defensive (paticulrary Parsecboy who was the other editor involved and he told me politely to "piss off") it irriates me how just because they have admin preferences (which they are using as an exscsue to twist peoples words and threaten them) that they think they are superior than anyone else and dont give the newbies a chance. No wonder 100s of possible new wikipedians get scared away by admins. they should be greatfull that i actually bothered to stay on wikipedia and put up with this.
Then i put it back and i asked him again why he removed it and he grumbled something obscure about that the other persons post was over a month old , even though it was barely 2 weeks old.
Ed accused me of personal attacks and then he changed his tune and said that im hassling month old comments which is ridiculous anyway they cant possibly treat me like this. I was sticking up for Dapi and offering my help to other users , i thought thats what wikipedia and pretty much any good community supports, Guess i was wrong.
I tried to reason with them that i remove one of them but nope , Parsecboy backed him up with what came across as a rather smirky remark telling me to politely get lost.
its called good faith and helping out in the community- and indeed i do have better things to do such as college and writing my novels/books among other things. Leave the page as it is, if you must ive removed the first thing since you were grumbling about that. It really isnt no Sudetenland ; Yet they kept making it into a big deal but they STILL didnt fully explain themselves. And it wasnt even a month old , it was barely 2 weeks.
You got a verdict on this? What should i do? Goldblooded (talk) 19:17, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Some party involved in Arb/Senkaku case changed content of a cited guideline
Hi, recently user:Oda Mari, an involved party in the Arb/Senkaku case initiated changes in the content of the guideline WP:NCGN#Multiple local names that I mentioned and cited in my Statement, Evidence, and my proposal in Workshop there. And the example "Liancourt Rocks" there was also raised by you and Penwhale in your statements. Oda Mari challenged this guideline in her Evidence (her historic version). Now she changed this guideline whose content did not favor her stance when the Arb case opened into a version that is less unfavorable for her stance (the difference of the two versions). The verifiability of the content after her change is questionable. The pre-exist one stated "... has been adopted rather than select either the Korean or Japanese name for the feature", while now her version is "... has been adopted, in part because it has been often used by the US government, in part because it is neither Korean nor Japanese". From links she provided and thoughts I got from you when we had talks and your comments in related talk page, the reason "in part because it has been often used by the US government" is not the reason why the name "Liancourt Rocks" was chosen. As you was heavily involved in solving the Laincourt issue, it is kind if you offer your help to clarify this in that Evidence talk page. I don't think it was appropriate for her to do such change because:
She is an involved party in this Arb case and the guideline is tightly related to this case.
The verifiability of the content after her change is questionable.
It may trigger edit-dispute or edit-war if other parties try to dispute and revert such change for that guideline.
Hey scout , do you know of a tool or a wikipedia program that can show you what articles you edit the most? Or something to that effect? Goldblooded (talk) 11:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
After talking to more OTRS staff today, restoration of the article was done by me. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 17:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks!
I started to add more material.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 19:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't plan on sending it to AFD (why procedure for the sake of it) but I really hope this should be the end of the issue. But I just ask that you understood what was going through my mind 2 years ago. BTW, is the article still locked under any kind of protection? If so, any admin has my consent to remove it because I will be stepping away for a while. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 20:04, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
File:Double sided end wrench diagonal.png listed for deletion
As I cannot see the content of the FBLA-PBL article before its speedy deletion, I cannot argue that there was not material in that article that constituted a copyright violation. However, I cannot imagine that there is no content that was not copied or that a bare stub could not be created to serve as a place holder by editing down a previous version of the article, especially as there are dozens of articles linking here. Alansohn (talk) 14:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
When I find a copyright violation, I usually try and link the source. The problem with this article is that the history is full of them and finding a good version would be hard. I'll get a base stub and the infobox restore now. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 16:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to look for this. I can't remember ever reading the article, but it's referenced by many school articles that I have edited and its appearance as a red link seems off. Alansohn (talk) 02:04, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Commons files brought up to Wiki-EN?
Sorry to bother you, but is there a new policy I'm not aware of? Admin:Anomie has brought up local copies of several important Commons files, including several national flags, and put them under protection, with the reasoning that they are some of the most used files we have, and therefore are "high-risk". I don't see what we could possibly gain from this practice, and also if these files Commons versions ever need to be corrected or updated, we would have to do the same to he Wiki-EN local copies too. The following list is what has been brought up so far.
as well as many dialogue signs such as File:Ambox deletion.png. Most of these files are either protected on Commons anyways, or have never been under threat of vandalism, so I don't understand why they would need to be duplicated and protected up on Wikipedia English as well. Fry1989eh? 20:09, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Having protection for high risk templates and images are off and on, but there is a way to protect said files without having to upload them here. I am going to have to figure it out soonish. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 21:19, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Zscout370. You have new messages at Fry1989's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
An arbitration case regarding Senkaku Islands has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
User:Tenmei is indefinitely topic banned from the subject of Senkaku Islands, widely construed. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and userspace.
Tenmei is advised that his unusual style of communication has not been conducive to resolving this dispute. Accordingly, Tenmei is urged to develop a different style of communication, which is more similar to that used by experienced Wikipedia editors. Until this happens, Tenmei is advised not to engage in topics which are the subject of a dispute.
Tenmei is banned for one year.
User:Bobthefish2 is topic banned from the subject of Senkaku Islands, widely construed, for one year. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and user space.
User:STSC is warned to avoid any sexualisation of discussions, especially during disputes.
The parties are reminded that attempts to use Wikipedia as a battleground may result in the summary imposition of additional sanctions, up to and including a ban from the project.
An uninvolved administrator may, after a warning given a month prior, place any set of pages relating to a territorial dispute of islands in East Asia, broadly interpreted, under standard discretionary sanctions for six months if the editing community is unable to reach consensus on the proper names to be used to refer to the disputed islands.
While a territorial dispute is subject to discretionary sanctions due to this remedy, any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in these topical areas, after an initial warning.
For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 21:30, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
; see Talk:Flag of Ecuador for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Aaron north (talk) 16:34, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
![[6]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Serbia.jpg){kind=link}
![[7]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Serbia_gerb.jpg){kind=link}
![[8]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Serbia.png){kind=link}
wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
wikimedia.org.
.svg){kind=link}
Template:MOD Serbia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:34, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
![[15]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Clemson_University_athletics_logo2.png){kind=link}
![[16]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Duke_text_logo.svg){kind=link}
![[17]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:University_of_North_Carolina_Tarheels_Interlocking_NC_logo.svg){kind=link}
![[18]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CrimsonTideAlogo.png){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png)
from 896 × 448 pixels(current) to 1,235 × 650 pixels ??, the reason is because the current size is to small than the other flag like US flag, Brazil flag and etc. → 
, 
.JPG){kind=link}
![[28]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Azerbaijan_on_document.JPG){kind=link}
![[30]](http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/u/us-nc-mb.gif){kind=link}
United States"; true, but Matsui is and considers himself Japanese. He only plays in the US because we have better baseball, he doesn't refer to himself as an American; sticking an American flag next to his name could lead people to think that he now considers himself to be an American. Similar things can happen with war veterans; Ernest Hemingway fought in the Spanish Civil War with Spanish forces, but was himself American. The other issue, which is far more pointed in longevity articles but still an issue here, is that nationality isn't always important. In the case of (just for fun) the war between the Red and White armies in the USSR, it doesn't really matter whether the White Army soldier was British, Russian, or American, it's more important to emphasize that the soldier fought for the Mensheviks. A final small point that's worth noting is that flag icons take up a considerable amount of bandwidth because they're transcluded onto pages; the List of living supercentenarians article, before all the flag icons were removed, took my computer a lot longer to load than it does now. Even though we aren't usually supposed to worry about performance, one of the exceptions is if you notice a change, and you can confirm that it's something specific causing it. I hope that helps.
