User talk:Shyam/Archive2
 | 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. |
Deleting unsourced images.
Hi, I assume you are using a bot to remove images from pages - it missed one on Boggle (dog), you should update your bot to remove images that are inside infoboxes. These images typically do not have the Image: prefix. Just thought you should know - Trysha (talk) 15:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi! Don't yoy think Political integration of India should be there in Portal:India Selected articles? It's been a featured article in Wikipedia.So no question about its quality.Please comment.--Dwaipayanc 18:29, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
No source images
You do not need to delete the no source image from my page. You can put up a request by placing a template tag on the page of the unsourced photograph page, or the talk page. Thank you for your concerns, but I would rather like to keep that image. Further efforts on your part to make changes on my userpage would not be appreciated. --Andy123 20:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Urshyam, I think what you were doing was an incorrect way of doing things. You should have placed that picture for speedy deletion by adding the appropriate template tags on the image page. Removing them from other pages is not your job. If the image gets deleted by the bureaucracy, then the image will automatically be removed from the pages that are using the image. --Andy123 12:02, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
While we're on the subject of untagged images, I see you're not notifying any uploaders, as the template recommends. Oftentimes the image was uploaded when the user was new, or the tag was overlooked, and they are happy to get the warning and fix their mistake. To take an example, Image:Brisbane River.jpg is almost certainly the creation of User:Shiftchange, an active editor whose other images are PD-self. (I notified him about this one.) It's also happened that vandals have blanked image description pages as a nasty trick. My suggestion is that you go back through the list and notify editors; slower, but forestalls the flaming torches and pitchforks. :-) Stan 12:57, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- The notification message is actually in the template, in the fine print lower down. In the case of Image:Castle Hedingham Vase.jpg, it's the {{subst:image source|Image:Castle Hedingham Vase.jpg}} ~~~~ bit; cut-n-paste the line onto talk pages, it expands into full notice and instructions about what to do. (Incidentally, the uploader says he took the vase pic, so the "no license" tag is more apropos.) It's a little slower to notify people, but as you can tell from perusing my talk page, they are grateful when we do it. Stan 13:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- No, there's no way to guarantee that image description changes will be seen just by editing the image. I personally put all my uploads on my watchlist, but apparently not many people even know about that. Stan 13:52, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Please Explain
Hi you have made modifications to two images I originally created specifically for some Articles the images are causeway_north.jpg and causeway_no.jpg one was replaced by another taken at the same spot with better lighting, the editor that posted the replacement advised at the time. What I cant understand is why you have removed the copyright status from both images. What changes did you make to the images. If they need adjustment I have the originals in higher resolutions than the post images let me know whats needed and I adjust on originals then repost Gnangarra 14:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hey bozo these images had the correct copyright status until you changed them but IDGAF go a head and delete them, but while you are at it fix all their links, their articles and get your own replacements and also speak to the other editor who provided a replacement to one images as well Gnangarra 14:45, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
{Please stop deliberately introducing incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.
- STOP please leave the images alone prior to your interferrance they had appropriate copyright tags. Revert them back to what they were or delete I dont care, and I wont be providing further images to Wikipedia if this is how they are going to be treated. Maybe next time you will leave a message to the originator first before doing this again Gnangarra 07:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Image:Camden-Comerica.JPG
Go ahead and delete it. I was just showing something to someone, some months back. It's not in any article. Wahkeenah 14:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
And delete the Carmen Electra one, too, while you're at it. Wahkeenah 18:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
cansat image
did you even read the description? it says very clearly it is from the state of wisconsin, with the individual who released rights to the wikipedia. what more do you want? ... aa:talk 17:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- PLEASE STOP. I left you a message regarding the last image. Both of them indicate where the rights are from and who the photo belongs to. If you are automatically adding these messages, I find them most egregious. ... aa:talk 17:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't add a tag because I didn't see one appropriate. That's why I described it on the page, which I might add, you didn't bother to read. Since you're the eager beaver here, why don't you add the tag, as I have more important things to do than chase down non-existent copyright issues. ... aa:talk 17:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Urshyam, this image is from Brandon Carter's homepage. I emailed him and he gave me permission to use it in the WP article I wrote. Clearly (yes?) the image should not be deleted, but what do I need to add to the image description page? TIA ---CH 18:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, the tag is still in Image:Carter01.JPG even though I believe there should be no problem. Can you see Image_talk:Carter01.JPG and either remove the tag or explain exactly what I need to fix? TIA ---CH 01:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Oops, now I get it. The image used in the biography is actually Image:BrandonCarter.JPG. This already had a note from me explaining the copyright situation, has has not been tagged. The image Image:Carter01.JPG is a duplicate which I inadvertently created and then (since I am not an admin) could not delete. So by all means delete Image:Carter01.JPG on the grounds of being superfluous, but please do not delete Image:BrandonCarter.JPG, because WP has permission to use the image and this one is used, in Brandon Carter. Whew, hope that's clear now! ---CH 01:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Tag removed
I have removed the tag from Image:Castlecornet.jpg, because I state quite clearly that I am the originator of that picture. It was taken on my own camera, and I don't see where the problem lies. --MacRusgail 18:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
CCleaner image
That image is "promotional material", i found it on CCleaner website. http://www.ccleaner.com/help/faq_general.asp#q1.2 I take it as it can be used in Wikipedia because its art made by owner of CCleaner so that other can promote the product. -- Frap 19:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Image:Cayman Islands Turtle
The image is a photograph of a pin badge in my collection. I am not sure how to change the licensing notice, perhaps you could advise me.
Image:Canarywharfview.jpg
Thanks for your message, in which you state that "the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content", and for the notice you attached to Image:Canarywharfview.jpg, which claims that "This image has no source information". I wonder, does the term "Photographer" mean anything to you, at all? As in, "Photographer: James Gibbon"? jamesgibbon 21:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: Image Tagging Image:Camille 1969 map.gif
Hi, thanks for notifying me of this image. However, the content is outdated and no longer used on the page it was meant for. You can safely delete this if you want. -- RattleMan 22:13, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you tagged Image:Carl Blegen.gif as no source, even though there is a source. A better tag would be {{nld}} (no license). --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 22:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- Heh, I am not the uploader of the image, but if its self no source or no license, its fate will end up the same, I am just a fellow WP:UIer here :) --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 22:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
??
Why are you so keen to get everything deleted? Rhyddfrydol 22:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
I thought I did the copyright thing for this image I have put {{GFDL}} on the image page
???
Please read about Wikimedia Commons, before placing more tags on my talk page. -- User:Docu
Image tagging
Could you please be more careful about tagging images as "no source"? Image:Borg-chip.jpg, for example, indicates both source ("taken myself") and license terms ("GNUFDL"). --Carnildo 08:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Image:Camden-Comerica.JPG
Somebody else already complained about its tag. I only uploaded it to show someone who claimed that the two ballparks looked identical, which they don't. That was months ago. Delete it. Wahkeenah 09:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Image: Cavaeyere
Urshyam, Thanks for checking that the image i had uploaded was correctly done and free of copyright. I had marked it down as hol photo...but should have been more specific and said this is my own holiday photo and as such is free of copyright. I have removed the tag you placed and updated the description. Any questions? Just ask Collieman 11:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
tagging Image:Camden-Comerica.JPG and Image:Camille 1969 map.gif
A suggestion: When tagging images for speedy deletion, instead of just entering "Uploader allows it for deletion", you should also actually provide a link to the page where the uploader posted that message. That way, I and other admins can easily verify it without wasting time trying to search for it... and effectively explain why the image was deleted if somebody asks about it later. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: picture
Hi. They must have moved the page that originally contained the image. I browsed the website a little and found it again on http://history.utah.gov/news_and_events/currents/past_issues/fall04.html. The site is part of the Utah.gov domain and the Utah.gov Terms of Use apply (they are listed here (see item 4): http://www.utah.gov/disclaimer.html.
So I am not sure how to go about it. Like I said, I originally downloaded the image from a page that is no longer available at it's original location, but it is still available in their archives.
BigBen212 04:51, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- Also, I want to point out that in fact, the upload does have information about where it was downloaded and what the copyright status is. BigBen212 04:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Caballistics image
The image is, as it states, from 2000AD comic, originally published in 2004. As I had already stated and linked (from the image), 2000AD management have given Wikipedia the right to use single panels of art. I have now added artist information and a tag: can you please check these? Oh, and you might want to try reading the description before tagging things for deletion in future.Vizjim 07:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Images
Please delete Image:CA 66.gif and Image:KS 66.gif. I uploaded both of them and they have since been replaced by other images. In the future, please leave a smaller notice on my talk page about images without tags (although I was sure the Cherokee Turnpike image had one). I just archived my old talk page and you've already taken up half of my next one.Rt66lt 14:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete my masterpiece that I created myself, and I don't even know what it represents, which I uploaded on 21 November 2005 for testing purposes?
- OK, delete--Odysses 19:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but you will have to take it on faith - and I feel it's reasonable to ask that you do so - that I have William's permission to use a picture of an old cancelled check he wrote. He took pains to protect his identity, and I can not comply with your directive without betraying his confidence. I am left with no other option here but to stipulate that any further action against the image will be reported as vandalism. Your understanding will be appreciated. knoodelhed 22:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Must be a Mafiosi, although they don't normally write checks. Maybe this author could fill out one of his own checks and photograph it??? Wahkeenah 01:31, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
My Roomba tagged images
Bless you for your kindness! I was so frustrated, my images get tagged and I could not untag them. It was so much work to get them into the articles just to see them deleted... Thanks! Renmiri 15:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: Image Tagging Image:Cc border.gif
Your post: Image Tagging Image:Cc border.gif
I cannot remember why I uploaded that image, yet I am sure that I do not need it anymore. I will attach a {{ifd}} tag to the image and list it at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Thankyou for informing me. --cheese-cube 01:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging: NLD
Hello. I've noticed that you've done some great work for tagging untagged images. However, I notived that for copyright issues, you are notifying the uploader but not tagging the image with {{subst:nld}}. Please remember to tag every image, even if it will most likely be deleted in 7 days (no need to be afraid of deleted edits, I have over 800 due to work like this and with CSDs). Thanks. --ZsinjTalk 02:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- Haha, good stuff! Check out Wikipedia:Untagged Images for the project we have going on for tagging images. I've run across a lot of your work, so you're on the right track. ;-) --ZsinjTalk 15:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Clivia image tagging
Thanks for telling me about the image tagging, I had uploaded that photo when I first came to Wikipedia, I had obviously not known how to do things properly. I have fixed it. It was easy as it was created by me :-). Thanks --liquidGhoul 10:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Def Lep photo - Classic_05.jpg
Thanks for the message. I can't remember if the photo was ever used in an article, but by the current look of the Def Leppard page, the photo isn't required - so I think we can let the image be deleted. P 11:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
You are doing a god job with image tagging, but please be careful. This image is not licensed under the GFDL. It has a non-standard license, some of which is incompatible with the GFDL so it is not an "equivalent license". Thryduulf 13:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- It isn't cc-by-sa either. You cannot apply a license to something unless it is explicitly available under that license. The only exception is where the image is available under a more free license that alows less free licenses to also be applied (e.g. public domain places no restrictions. cc-by allows cc-by-sa, but cc-by-sa does not allow cc-by). Thryduulf 14:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Copyrighted images
Image:Cisalpine Republic 1801.png and Image:Cispadane Republic 1797.png are screenshot of The Centennia Atlas. I asked them the permission to use them on Wikipedia, and received it. What's the best tag to describe this license?--Panairjdde 15:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- I would reccomend {{windows-software-screenshot}} --ZsinjTalk 15:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- {{software-screenshot}} works too. Enjoy! --ZsinjTalk 15:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
:Image:Class 171-cab.jpg
That looks like a non-free CC lisence would fit: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ The template for that is {{cc-by-nc-sa}}, which forwards to {{db-noncom}}. --ZsinjTalk 16:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- If {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} isn't acceptable, tag as {{subst:nld}} and have the uploader tag the image. If it isn't tagged within 7 days, "So sorry." --ZsinjTalk 16:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Image:Mda logo.png
Hi, I've moved this over to commons. How do I update the image here? Does it have to be deleted? ... aa:talk 23:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your notice that this image has no source information, however if you actually read the image page you'll see it reads "Sourced from http://www.footyjumpers.com/, Image used with permission." Which could scarcely be a more straightforward statement of source! I've removed the template from the image page. Cheers!--The Brain of Morbius 12:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Selected Article stream
Hi Shyam,
I need your help with determining how to stream Selected Articles. I am planning on creating such a stream for Portal:USA and I was hoping you could walk me through the proces. Thanks! AreJay 15:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info Shyam. I will try and hopefully get something up for the US portal pretty soon. AreJay 03:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Congreve titlepage 1692
Hi,
I just found your message on Congreve's Novel Incognita (1692), the titlepage. I uploaded several 17th and 18th century-titlepages and assumed they were all free of copy right restrictions due to their age - and due to the mode of publication i.e. as visual quote (I published hundreds of these in a book on early 18th century novels). --Olaf Simons 16:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I am the creator of the image. I merged Image:Soccerball.svg a public domain image, and Image:Current event marker.png a copyrighted image by the Wikimedia Foundation. I would release it into public domain but I don't know if there is a problem with the copyrighted image. CG 21:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I am Sofie. So, you cannot have images on your personal user page? I thought it was pretty and could say more about who I am than the odd desciption. What a shame. Now I will have a blank intro page. - Best wishes, Sofie
- I deleted it myself. It was superseded by Image:Current sport.svg. CG 21:38, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
G'day there! I had completely forgotten about that image; thanks for bringing it to my attention. The image is unnecessary and orphaned and I've deleted it (I should have done so months ago). I just thought I'd point out one thing, though: just because an image doesn't have a tag, doesn't mean it's got no copyright info. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 00:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Images posted by CoolFox
Thank you for calling attention to the lack of a tag on Image:Crpf.gif, and giving me a warning instead of just deleting the image outright. I've put a symbol tag on the image, stated a fair use clause, and purpose of the image in the article. You may go ahead (if you possess the administrative power) and delete the orphaned Image:CoolFox outside.jpg, as I have removed it from my userpage intentionaly and do not intend on posting it again. Good day to you, and thank you again. --CoolFox 00:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thanks for being
a watchdog for the photo copyright issue. You recently sent me 4 notices that the copyright of some of my pictures were not done correctly, and I just fixed that. A side note is that I posted a lot of photos at Gettysburg Battlefield, including those, and the curator of that article decided that the pictures were not to be used there, so removed them. Thus these shots are not used in any article, and so perhaps should be removed. Do you have an opinion? Should unconnected photographs stay in wikipedia for future use or to fill in a particular stage of the article's development, or not? Life is supposed to be interesting. Carptrash 00:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- rather than tossing the images I plan on contributing at least a stub on the artists who created the statues shown in the pictures and thus have an article to link them to. Thanks for your involvment. Carptrash 16:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- I just did a not-very-pretty article on Donald De Lue and hooked up twp of the images. More later, I think. Carptrash 16:56, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:Carcass.jpg
Go ahead and delete it; I only uploaded it to post at the Reference Desk, as part of a question. It's not being used in any articles. Battle Ape 06:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for notifying me...
...that my Image:DaumerHugoLouisNapoleon1848.jpg was inadvertently left without copyright status. I've rectified the situation. --Wetman 07:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging again
Could you please be more careful about tagging images as being unsourced? Image:Carte France Département 15.png is very clearly labeled as being a re-name of commons:Image:Cantal-Position.png. --Carnildo 08:23, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I received a message that my image of Corsica is not used in any articles, but it is in the article on Corsica. What's the deal? Ksnow 13:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)Ksnow
Image of Corsica
Then mine can be deleted. It's the same picture. Ksnow 13:57, 10 March 2006 (UTC)Ksnow
Fair Use
That image is clearly fair use--it is a television screenshot. However, I don't understand how to add the fairusein tag or clear this up.--Cassius987 17:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Images without Sources.
Thank you for letting me know, I added in the proper license (or at least I hope) for both images.
DON PELAYO
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imagen:Don_Pelayo.jpg
THAT'S WHERE I GOT IT FROM! I DID NOT UPLOAD IT!!!! I'm sticking to text. Images are a waste of my bloody time. Nothing but grief!! Hiberniantears 04:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
==Image copyright problem with Image:Dettifoss Iceland3.jpg==
As stated in the upload comment: (Version 3 for FPC See original Image:Iceland_Dettifoss_1972.jpg for photographer & license) Since this was a temporary file, you may delete it as you see fit. Thanks, --Janke | Talk 06:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
deathrockers.jpg
If you are going to send me a message saying that a JPEG I uploaded doesn't meet some criteria, then PLEASE explain to me what exactly it is I need to do to fix it. I'm not a Unix geek, I don't write code for a living, I can't tear apart a computer and install a new hard drive or anything like that. Wikipedia is set up like a maze and it takes me hours to find out how to do something (and even then it's usually by trail and error.) I'm frustrated enough with Wikipedia that I've tried to get my account deleted, but the powers who be refuse to do that. I have permission from the photographer (who e-mailed me the JPEG) to use it on the Wikipedia website. FilmGal 08:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:DoverCastle-bailey-2004-10-03.jpg
Hi Urshyam.
The two images: Image:DoverCastle-bailey-2004-10-03.jpg and Image:DoverCastle-lighthouse-2004-10-03.jpg were not uploaded by me - I just edited them and when I re-uploaded, a slow Wikipedia 'lost' the file history. I think they were originally contributed by User:Thryduulf and were probably GFDL licenced. I'll leave a message asking on their talk page. Regards, Ian Dunster 13:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Tagging Photos
The pics you informed me that will be deleted are mine. I took them when on vacation. I have tried many times to label them but am having difficulties. How can I label things correctly, specifically photos I took and photos that appear on other websites? Please help!
Tagging Photos
How do I go back to the pull down screen for each photo? I dont see it whenever I click on an image? This is very confusing.
Exempt.gif
I've today replaced that with (self-made) Exempt.png. So I've deleted the gif. Rich Farmbrough 22:03 11 March 2006 (UTC).
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Elektra1.jpg)
Thanks for your note. This image was removed from the article (Elektra Records) in november and I replaced it with a slighty better quality image I had.
Re: Image:DavidMarkLaing age six.JPG
I would delete the image myself but, alas, I don't know how. It is no longer needed for my user page and (as it turns out) is not even a picture of me, but of my brother.--OldCommentator 00:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: Image:EspadaS2 8368 1971.jpg
I got that picture from the photographer via email with permission to post it on Wikipedia. (Entheta 14:32, 12 March 2006 (UTC))
Cleaning up your messes
Hey, you need to quit fooling around with other things and finish cleaning up the huge mess you made last week. Category:Images with unknown source as of 3 March 2006 has hundreds of incorrectly-tagged images, they have been removed from pages by OrphanBot and so will now need all kinds of extra edits to restore, and finally the images are now subject to deletion by admins not aware of your screwup. So get busy. Stan 16:41, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- Good luck, OrphanBot edited over 500 pages just a few hours ago. I left a note on the category page to try to forestall trigger-happy admins. Stan 17:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Dwads
Hi. I created the image of dwads myself using MSWord. It is based upon commonly used astrological information that can be found on any reference book on dwads. I see that yo are from India, so you should be familiar with dwads since it is my understanding that they originate in your neck of the woods.--TracyRenee 19:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: Image copyright problem with Image:Ek04.jpg
Well, thanks for the warning (actually, I owe to say this to everyone else who gave me this kind of warning), but I don't know how do I insert an image in a regular way (you can see I'm a n00b at Wikipedia even because I have no user page as of now). Well, I always try to include which URL I took the image from, but now I see it's not considered a consistent copyright information. So how should I do it?
I'll be thankful if you can answer me.--Omdfg 17:37 (Brazilian time, GMT -3h), 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Shyam
Hi Shyam how is it goin?
This is Ranjith Joy (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Eltouch)
thats about me. I was wondering if they could add in a picture of one of my portfolio work
http://www.eltouch.com/showcase/content/Wallpapers/Artwork/Kezikutty.jpg This is a photoshop work. A painting of my neice, Keziah.
And I was wondering if you could change Eltouch to EL Touch and route Ranjith Joy to the same page.
Nice to see Indians are in the team.
Thanks Ranjith
Image Tag Condit
Thanks for noticing that it lacked a tag. See Image Talk for my note on the tag situation.--TheGrza 00:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Image:Formula One organisation.PNG
Hi. I created the image myself using Microsoft Publisher 2000. Although it uses information and layout ideas from the sources I added it is an original work, with important changes and additions. As such I've added the cc-by-sa-2.5 tag. Regards, Mark83 09:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Chillingham Castle
I'm confused as to why I've been told that there's no copyright information for the Chillingham Castle image. I put it in the talk page right underneath the image :S
Is this wrong? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Snodawg (talk • contribs) 16:24, 13 March 2006.
Image:Corse map with placenames.png
Thanks for informing about the orphan status of this image which I had uploaded. I don't know why it was removed from the article Corsica, I'll be asking the person who removed it. Pls let me know what I need to do in order to not get the image deleted (apart from re-inserting it back to the article of course). Jay 17:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Confusion
Hi. You left a message on my talk page regarding Chillingham Castle. My comment on this page ends "As such I've added the cc-by-sa-2.5 tag." User:Snodawg then added the unsigned comment about the castle. I've edited it to make it clearer. Regards Mark83 22:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:El Rom.PNG
I wouldn't worry about the copyright for it, the person who uploaded it works directly for the foundation as jimbo's assistant and is therefore would be extremely careful about the copyright status. It came form the hebrew wikipedia. Mike (T C) 
02:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Nope no hebrw, but Danny can be trusted to eventually tag the image, i wouldnt worry about it. Mike (T C)
04:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
HELP!!!!! pleads Skookumplanet
Your email link didn't work for me.
You placed a message on my user page about an image, "ForTop.png", saying it might be deleted because it has no source information.
I'm extremely confused by your message.
I have ten images I uploaded at roughly the same time as the one in question. All others I did properly assign GFDL to. I created all the images.
I spent much time reading the Wiki material on copyrights -- all of the links you provide I've covered.
Where can I find info on how to correct this problem? I found nothing, no info, nor any links on "ForTop.png" itself, on editing the accompanying image page. Just for downloading the image file to my computer for editing the image itself, not the accompanying information.
Do I need to go through the entire procedure from the beginning? Or can I simply add the appropriate GFDL to the current image?
As I would have to reread the procedures again, a means to simply add the copyright waiver would make it much easier for me. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
Skookumplanet, email -- to_swc@yahoo.com
Cricket
Hi, great work on all the cricket articles. Please note that Michael Clarke can refer to many people, not just the cricketer. The same applies for [[Ian Bell] and Simon Jones. Keep up the excellent work.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 07:10, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, yeah that image does have a tag, however it does not have a source (notice also that the bloiplate of the tag itself also says a source is required), wich is why I tagged it as "no source". I think that is quite apropriate. Logos and albumcovers are one thing, but promo images should at the very least tell us who it is we believe hold the copyright. --Sherool (talk) 18:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Copied from my talk page --Sherool (talk) 21:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sherool, but this tag is only for asking user to help in tagging. Please read ehat the tag says. Thanks Shyam (T/C) 18:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- "This image has no source information. Source information must be provided so that the copyright status can be verified by others. Unless the copyright status is provided and a source is given, the image should be deleted seven days after this template was added" (the last emphasis is mine) Seems pretty clear to me. The image does not have source info and will be deleted unless it's provided because the license info can not be verified without a source. Adding a license tag does not mean the image does not need a source, both are required, one without the other is not enough. --Sherool (talk) 21:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- To put it another way, if the only information on an image is "promophoto", how is it that anybody knows that it is one? Is the copyright held by the player, his agent, his team, or the league? News and magazine reporters often take very similar poses as part of doing interviews, how do you know it's not one of those? We should always be able to trace back to the original, just as our articles' claims should be traceable back to their source texts. We can accept some cases on a bit of faith, for instance for older promophotos the physical press kits are long vanished, and we might only have someone's assertion that the image was actually scanned from a press kit photo, but at least we want somebody to say that. Stan 22:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging
Hey, Shyam. That image was uploaded by me such a long time ago that I can't even remember it. I'm almost positive it was an AP or Reuters image, so I'm uncertain about the copyright status. Incidentally, I wonder what the name of that template you used on my page is. I've seen it around and I always felt it was rather harsh and imposing, so I'd like to leave a note on the template talk page. Thanks, JHMM13 (T | C) 
19:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. I think it should be deleted as I can't exactly remember where I got it from and at the time I was ignorant as to what Wikipedia's image copyright policy was. Thanks, JHMM13 (T | C)
19:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Shyam, Thanks but I'm still not clear
Thank you for your prompt reply.
But your response didn't give me the information I was seeking. And I have another question, also.
1 My other images have a Summary section and a Licensing section, BOTH of which HAVE an EDIT link to the far right of them. I can access and change the image page that way.
BUT, the image in question, FormTop.png, has NO Summary or Licensing sections, and NO EDIT LINKS. HOW can I put the appropriate creator information and the appropriate copyright information onto it's image page, WITHOUT ANY EDIT BUTTONS?
2 The type of license is a seperate question. I used a PD-Release license [I think]. In any case, all my other images have a license that states, "I, the creator of this work, hereby release..."
You can see how I did my other images by looking at StripRightMid.png. Is that license on the image sufficent? If so, HOW do I add it to FormTop.png?
Thanks for your help. User:Skookumplanet
mistake
Shyam, you have incorrectly posted an image deletion notice on my talk page. The image in concern, Image:Forces of evil - jay and john ska summit 2003.PNG has not been uploaded by me. As for the other image notices that you have posted, I am well aware of them, as they are clearly images uploaded by me. I doubt that any of them can be salvaged since I was very ignorant of the image policy at that time, in fact I didn't know it existed. I apologize for any inconvenience my earlier ineptitude has caused you. Deyyaz [ Talk | Contribs ] 20:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
You tagged this image for speedy deletion, with the reason "Author requests deletion", however you are not the author of this page. Additionally, only pages created by mistake can be deleted this way. If the image is redundant, please tag it with {{Redundant image|NewImageName}}. Thanks! Stifle 21:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello Stifle, Thanks for your advice for Redundant image deletion. I will be following the same procedure as you stated. But concerning the image which you are telling about that author did not make a request for deletion is quite confusing for me because on the image page itself he stated Delete this map; it has been superseded. So i think he wants to request deletion. Regards, Shyam (T/C) 21:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- You posted the speedy tag, but you are not the author. Kelisi is. Since he posted the map originally and then the request after that, I will now speedy it. Stifle 21:21, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Sources for old images
Sooner or later we'll want to have sources for all old images too, but I consider that much lower priority than cleaning up modern and fair-use material. If an image is in the style of a 18th-century engraving for instance, it's safe to assume that it is that old. At some point I'd like to have people track down and record the original works; not only is it good scholarship, but in many cases we'll want to find the works and redo the scans for better quality. But I don't see this becoming the most important issue for at least the next two years. Stan 22:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, the purported PD-old images from around 1900 are problematic. Since the template requires 100 years after the death of the author, the closer one gets to 1906, the more important it is to know the source. It would be perfectly fine to add no-source tags; personally I don't usually bother when working untagged images, on the theory that there is always time to go back later and work on sourcing. Stan 02:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Portal:India concerns
Hi Shyam, since you're heading up our Selected Articles administration, can you please address User:Ganeshk's concerns located here? We need to have a mechanism whereby users can nominate "Selected Articles". Please reply either on my talk page or directly on the Portal:India peer review page (preferable). Thanks! AreJay 02:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Shyam, thanks for your prompt action towards addressing Ganesh's PR questions on Portal:India. AreJay 14:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, Shyam
I believe I got my copyright correct. It was easy once I knew what to do.
One more favor to ask of you. Could you stop by FormTop.png to confirm I did it correctly. There's no need to respond unless something is incorrect, such as where I put my 4 tildes.
If I don't hear from you, in a few days I'll make the other images I've uploaded conform the FormTop.png copyright style.
Thank you for the help!
Skookumplanet 05:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Source vs license
The fundamental principle is that source info is orthogonal to license info. So every GFDL-tagged image does need a source; for instance, {{GFDL-self}} supplies both source ("me") and license in a very succinct way. Since very few people outside of the wikimedia and free software worlds have even heard of GNU, let alone GFDL, it's almost always the case that a correctly-described GFDL image is the creation of the uploader or someone they know very well. But you're right that many images do not say so, and some have been tagged as GFDL incorrectly (another future cleanup project!). Image:Hkfflag.gif seems really unclear as to creator, so "no source" is the right annotation. Stan 15:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Shyam
Yes, I'm certain it qualifies as my image and my copyright. It's excerpted material that I altered by cutting up and pasting together differently and then put my own drawing on top of it. I'm an artist, and this count's as new material and is copyrightable around the world.
Thanks, Skookumplanet 18:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Please note that this edit doesn't make sense because that tag only applies to images used under a 'fair use' claim (not PD images). Thanks! -SCEhardT 19:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- If you think a PD or GFDL image should be deleted, list it at WP:IFD. -SCEhardT 19:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Australasia Cup
I noticed your name via on a the history of of one of the cricket player articles. I was wondering if you could write up an article on the Australasia Cup, or direct me to where I can find some information on it. I tried google but really couldn't find much information besides on a select few events of the past. Pepsidrinka 20:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Images from www.mil.no
Regarding your notice to me regarding two images.Please see Wikipedia_talk:Copyrights#Norwegian_defense_or_government_images. Any help is welcome.Inge 21:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Esperanza
Welcome, Shyam/Archive2, to Esperanza, the Wikipedia member association! As you might know, all the Esperanzians share one important goal: the success of this encyclopedia. Within that, we then attempt to strengthen the community bonds, and be the "approachable" side of the project. All of our ideals are held in the Charter, the governing document of the association.
Now that you are a member, you might be interested in some of our programs. A quite important program is the StressUnit, which seeks to support editors who have encountered any stress from their Wikipedia events, and are seeking to leave the project. So far, Esperanza can be credited with the support and retention of several users. We have a calendar of special events, member birthdays, and other holidays that you can add to and follow.
In addition to these projects, several more missions of Esperanza are in development, and are currently being created at Esperanza/Possibles.
I encourage you to take an active voice in the running of Esperanza. We have a small government system, headed by our Administrator general, Celestianpower, and guided by the Advisory Committee , KnowledgeOfSelf, JoanneB, Titoxd and FireFox. The elections have ended.
If you have any other questions, concerns, comments, or general ideas, Esperanzian or otherwise, know that you can always contact me via email or talk page. Alternatively, you could communicate with fellow users via our IRC channel, #wikipedia-esperanza (which is also good for a fun chat or two :). I thank you for joining Esperanza, and look forward to working with you in making Wikipedia a better place to be!
