User talk:Gay Cdn/Archive 6
RE: Orphaned fair use image (Image:The Creator of Light Horakti (Blackheart).JPG)[edit]
I have hyperlinks to these images on my userpage so please remove them from the speedy deletion list. So they are not orphaned images! I would greatly appriciate it. Big Boss 0 01:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I have removed your tag for speedy deletion on the images that I uploaded. They link to my file. Do not mess with them again. They are mine and not to be deleted unless I say so. It took me a long time to figure out how to upload them and I have every intention to keep them. Big Boss 0 01:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Picture[edit]
Gay Cdn --
Thanks for your kind message regarding the Drew Jacoby picture, and I apologize for not getting back to you sooner! If you have not already, go ahead and delete that image; I believe I may have made the mistake of uploading the same image twice and used the other version for the article, hence the one orphaned image. Thank you for bringing it to my attention, and for your work as a Wikipedia deletionist!
Emmegan 02:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Just delete this immediately, we don't need this picture on Wikipedia any longer. --PJ Pete
RE: Orphaned fair use image (Image:Psb2.jpg)[edit]
Hi Gay Cdn, thanks for your message. You may go ahead and delete this image as I wasn't aware of uploading a newer version of the same file at the time and replaced it with a new uploaded image that is now being used in the article.
I believe all other image files I have uploaded are being used in their intended articles. Thank you.
Inflammator 05:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Pride complete guide.jpg[edit]
Hello Gay Cdn. In your vote to delete this image, you said that the book was not discussed in the article. However, I found that it is discussed there. Would you reconsider your vote? Thank you. Nick Graves 17:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Big Boss 0 Images[edit]
Please remove the images of mine that you listed for speedy deletion from the list. There is a hyperlink to the images on my user page and they are there to give a visual representation of the card/cards. I would greatly appriciate it if you would do so. They are not orphaned images. It would be against policy to put them on my user page so I just put a hyperlink to the images on my user page and I am apparently not the only one using them. So I would greatly appriciate it if you would undo the damage that has been done and remove them from this list. You are putting me in more stress than I need to be in at any given time! So please remove them. Big Boss 0 14:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- This guy sounded so upset he unretired me from wikipedia. Do you have something against this guy? You seem to be targeting his things for no reason. He is using these images for encyclopedic use. You cannot have fair use images on your user page either. This is his only way of showing what the cards look like. Lay off a little bit okay. User: Nightmare 81
Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.[edit]
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 3 | 15 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 4 | 22 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag | WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness" |
| News and notes: Talk page template, milestones | Wikipedia in the News |
| Features and admins | The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
RE:Image copyright problem with Image:Copper_sulphate_crystal.JPG[edit]
thanks for your advice. However, since i don't have enough experience in editing photo, i really don't know what license i should choose. I creat the photo by myself. Would you mind to recommend a suitable license that i should choose?Superdvd 10:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Please delete this image. It is not being used in relation to any article at all. Please delete all images I have uploaded. Thank you, from Tovojolo (responding to a message you left for me) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tovojolo (talk • contribs)
Doll Photo[edit]
Just to let you know, I changed the picture back on the Dresden Doll page. The Quidam 03:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I am interested[edit]
thumb|55px|left|Vote early, vote often in getting people to vote about this picture which was just removed from the sacrifice article, so am contacting you because I saw you all over the deletion page. Please consider taking a few minutes, looking it over, and voicing an opinion. Thanks. Carptrash 04:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned Halo 3 pic[edit]
Go ahead and wipe it. The pic there now is far better. JAF1970 15:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
The two orphans may go.[edit]
You may proceed and delete Image:SKL138.gif and Image:S198.jpg any time. I would have done so myself, but I don't have that power. If it's alright, I shall delete your two messages from my talk page so as to keep things clean. Sage of Ice 23:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding orphan status of Image:Stannslogo.gif[edit]
Feel free to delete Image:Stannslogo.gif at any time. The image currently in use in the article is the more commonly recognized "logo" and is a better quality image. Lordjeff06 00:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Boring message left on User page[edit]
The following message was posted to my user page, I have moved it here and replied to the user on their talk page. Here is the message left on the talk page [1].
- If you were intending to bore the shit out of me you did a fine job.
- I don't know how to write you back normally, because I don't spend all day here, I couldn't find a reply button to your boring message. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrsJesseMartin (talk • contribs)
Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 5 | 29 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Two things:
- Please explain why you have chosen to grafitti and pick on the O'Neill Sea Odyssey page. It is not an advertisement, our program is a public service and it is free to youth. Do you have a problem with that?
- Do not deleted the compass image. It belongs to OSO.
O'Neill Sea Odyssey is a pubic benefit non-profit organization. People like to help and support programs that help kids and the environment. Dhaifley 06:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- To address this, first, I have never edited the O'Neill Sea Odyssey page, have a look at the history. The image I tagged, Image:Compasses.jpg is an orphan; not used. As for claiming it is an advertisement, quite frankly by reviewing the article, I do believe it likely fails WP:SPAM and you as the driving force behind the organization and writing the article, you are in breach of the project's conflict of interest guidelines. Also, no reliable sources are referenced in the article. All three of the above qualify the article for deletion review - but I am not going to go there at this time. Finally about the image's ownership, when you uploaded it, you indicated it was public domain, see [2]. By indcating that licence, you are negating any copyright claim to the image. Now, I doubt you have the ability to release the copyright, so its use here on wikipedia is under a fair use license; an orphaned fair use image is deletable in 48 hours. I am going to also copy this response to the user's talk page.--User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 12:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
![[2]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Compasses.jpg&oldid=100328515){kind=link}
- These are your opinions, and obviously you have singled us out. The article is factual; and you can do a google search to review the organization's history and see that the article is factual. The bottom line is, you have an agenda. Dhaifley 14:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- This user's "agenda" appears to be the same as everyone else's here - to improve Wikipedia in the best way we can. This user found an orphaned image and tagged it; that's part of routine Wikipedia maintenance. Your respective opinions of the article or its subject are of no consequence here. This article does appear to fail WP:COI though; some attention should probably be paid to these flaws. Flakeloaf 14:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Editing the page is one thing, threatening to delete portions are quite another. Dhaifley 15:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- The "threat" was to list the whole page for deletion, which is common practice for articles that are found with unsourced statements or are thought to have been written in bad faith. This is another common Wikipedia practice. You may want to read Wikipedia's policies on Conflict of Interest and Reliable Sources, among its others, so your future contributions will not be misunderstood. I look forward to seeing your next article! Flakeloaf 15:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for the support Flackloaf. I can assure you Dhaifley (and anyone else who cares) that I have no agenda in regards to nominating the particular image for deletion. I came across it while sorting through the list of images at Special:Uncategorizedimages. The only reason it went to Images for Deletion was because it was unused and appeared to be either an incorrectly tagged fair use or an personal photo. It turned out I assumed the latter and it was the former. As image pages do not retain any information about what articles they had previously existed in, I can assure you I had never heard of O'Neill Sea Odyssey or reviewed the page. It was the claim of applying grafitti to the page that alerted me to the page in the first place. At this point, I plan on simply letting the deletion discussion happen.--User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 18:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
The comments above are very sad. Most of us here on Wikipedia want to do the right thing, to provide great support for this free, online encyclopedia. Dhaifley 07:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
pictures[edit]
yeah no problem thanks for deleting them as there were better pictures for them so again thanks; no need to reply--Thugchildz
- removed copy of notices placed here by Thugchildz - the images referenced are: Image:Iccinter-con.Cup2006.gif, Image:U19wc06.png and Image:WCL.gif--User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 02:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Image:NZ Jav wn06031149tn.jpg[edit]
Hi. This image is not fair use - under New Zealand Crown Copyright it may be reproduced "free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission". When I uploaded the image I included the NZ crown copyright tag and the actual copyright statement from the website I sourced it from. However, as I have edited the grey bits out to create: Image:NZ Javelin wn06031149tn.JPG which is included in two article you may delete the original image as it is a waste of server space. Thanks, --Nick Dowling 07:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Orphaning[edit]
Please be more careful when fair use policing, for example here you messed up, no where does it say I uploaded that image, I have made reverts on that image, yes, but that does not mean I am the image uploader. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 15:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
The image you said that was orphaned was not. It was linked to by footnote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C3%ABlian_Church#_note-A_VERY_SPECIAL_SEMINAR_IN_LAS_VEGAS). However, that does not mean it will show up in the file links (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Raelian_Contact_273.pdf).Kmarinas86 04:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
RFA?[edit]
Hi. I've noticed the great work that you've been doing at WP:IFD. Would you be interested in trying to go through RFA? I've considered nominating you for awhile now. Would you be interested? We need more admins who are knowledgable about image issues and who can work on some of the backlogs. --BigDT 13:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, your mainspace edit count is very light. There are plenty of people who will oppose purely for edit count reasons ... and that's unfortunate, but it's just the way it is. Still, though, the outstanding work that you do at IFD speaks for itself. You won't pass 222-3 like some who have gone through ;) but barring any incivility - which I have looked through your contributions briefly and haven't seen any - I would think you will be ok.
- As for advice, the biggest word of advice I can offer is to not let oppose !votes bother you too much. A few of the oppose votes in my RFA really felt like being kicked in the gut because they were from people whom I respect. But you can't let it get to you. Also, other than to answer questions that are asked or correct obvious factual errors, you don't want to respond to oppose voters ... several RFAs in recent weeks have failed purely for that reason.
- I'm going to go ahead and fill out a nomination. It may be a little bit before I have it completely ready ... but I'll let you know when it's done.--BigDT 20:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please be sure to read the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nominate#What to do if you are nominated by someone else: ... leaving out a step is a bad thing. Good luck! ;) --BigDT 21:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good ... you can take as long as you need to answer the questions, of course ... just make sure that when you list it, you reset the expiration date/time to be exactly one week after the current time. --BigDT 21:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have some slight hope you won't get convinced by the RfA to recognize it as the true face of WP and leave. RfA is like a shark tank, once blood is smelled the trolls will tear the victim to pieces. I guess this is because RfA is one of few places on WP where one can show the dark side of own's heart. I once made the mistake and nominated a very active vandal fighter with thousand of edits per month. It was soon revealed what kind of scum he really is and he left, disgraced as one only could be. Although he returned months later his activity is order of magnitude lower than before. Pavel Vozenilek 17:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
"Biography of Living Persons Administrators ("BLP Admins") carry out a specialized, narrowly tailored administrative role within Wikipedia." Please see WP:BLPADMIN to offer your thoughts on this proposal. CyberAnth 03:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 6 | 5 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Time[edit]
Hey ... when I got home tonight, I had a number of messages and didn't notice your question about the RFA time, but it looks like you figured it out. Good luck! I know you'll do fine as an admin. --BigDT 02:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Texas map - Dallas.svg[edit]
Hi, the image Image:Texas map - Dallas.svg once existed on the Wikipedia but has since been deleted and is located on the commons using the same name. For some reason, its inclusion on Dallas, Texas in the infobox is blanked. Is there some kind of problem remaining from it being deleted? Is there a way to force that the image be pulled from the commons by using a certain image markup?
By the way, I ask you because you seem to be quite busy over at WP:IFD.. however I see that you aren't an administrator. Just looking for a little help! drumguy8800 C T 07:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- FYI, this is fixed. When something like this happens, click the "edit" link, then in the address bar in your browser, you will see "action=edit" at the end of the URL. Change "edit" to "purge" and hit enter. That will force Wikipedia to regenerate the other sizes of the image. --BigDT 12:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks playa drumguy8800 C T 18:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 7 | 12 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 8 | 19 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Fair use and Public domain and other legal things I don't understand and which you seem to know since you left that long paragraph[edit]
Hello! You just posted a long legal paragraph on my user page and I don't understand what I should do. I took that particular photo of the statue of a bird myself, in order to illustrate the Santa Fe article, and as with all the photos or drawings I upload to Wikipedia I placed it in the public domain. At least I thought I did. Now that I went back to the photo's page I find somebody has placed a message claiming that the statue is copyrighted by a certain sculptor. I don't see how that is relevant. The sculpture itself may not be reproduced, but in planning that photo for several days, choosing the exact time of day and thus the lighting as well as the angle and framing (note the inclusion of vegetation) for that two dimensional medium I created a separate work of art, and as susual I'm placing that work of art in the public domain. Should I go there and erase everything except what I just wrote in the previous phrases, and then put a clear statement that I'm placing the photo in the public domain? Thta's what you'll find I did when I took the pictures of other works of art in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Winterlude_snow_sculpting.jpg and also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Winterlude_ice_sculpture_museum.jpg. --AlainV 04:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I just went and had a look at the entire edit history of the upload page of my Santa Fe bird photo. I discovered that the last three edits were from an anonymous IP adress and that they first stated that the scultpure was copyrighted and then they completely erased the statement that I had written had taken the picture with my camera and that I was placing it in the public domain! They also erased the contributions of other (signed) Wikipedia editors who had kindly put in the proper PD tag!! --AlainV 05:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
RE: Orphaned fair use image (Image:Baseballnes.jpg)[edit]
Please delete this image immediately. It was to be used in an article which I made the mistake of creating and then found out it already existed under another name. In fact I didn't realize the picture had successfully uploaded as I received an error message during the upload process. Thanks for the notification. STLocutus 21:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 9 | 26 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)