User talk:ShakespeareFan00/Sfan00 IMG/Archive 12

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

Archives[edit]

File:F1RST.jpg

The photo was supplied by the recording artist O'Bryan to me to post and update his Wikipedia page. The picture is the photo used for the cover for his previous album "F1RST," and it is owned by Headstorm LLP. Please explain the rationale of sending a delete notification.

Najee12 (Najee12 (talk) 13:50, 27 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Photo of art[edit]

Template:Photo of art has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ViperSnake151 Talk 17:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

got it[edit]

Thanks--Ali Baba (talk) 09:46, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have received image from the owners[edit]

I have received File:Institute for Future Education Entrepreneurship and Leadership.jpg from the owners. Please help me putting the copyright information for this image. It will be great if you provide the link where I can put copyright details of the image.IndiWebPirate (talk) 10:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Kdamodaran.jpg[edit]

I have made changes in description page of file File:Kdamodaran.jpg, please verify .Thank you for notifying the issue. -- Raghith 10:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meow[edit]

I do have access to the information that this is El C's own photo of his own cat. Uploaded in 2004… But I wouldn't know what to add to the image page. El C has left the project. Bishonen | talk 12:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Re:File:WestwoodJr-1-.jpg needs authorship information[edit]

I've added the source and missing info. ---StevenBjerke 18:48, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Parkhead Station.jpg[edit]

Probably best to delete this, I uploaded it from the internet, a bad habit I've got over. Thanks for alerting me to this.

Non-free rational for Secret Adversary First Edition Cover 1922.jpg[edit]

Why did you add a non-free rational to File:Secret Adversary First Edition Cover 1922.jpg? I had already put a PD tag on there; as a work from 1922, it's perfectly fine in the US, even if it's not eligible for transferring to Commons.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Information" template[edit]

This is just to let you know, if you add {{Information}} with an empty "Author" field at an image I uploaded, I will be spammed by bots claiming the image is suddenly "unreferenced". --dab (𒁳) 11:47, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another one: File:Nicholson-Viaduct.JPG

Mis-applying an {{Information}} template and ignoring the source information that was already there in free text, led to a situation that Fastily could then auto-tagged as unsourced for deletion. It's a convoluted technique, but it's another way to get a few of these pesky images deleted.

It is of course far more important that the project has all pages equally formatted with newly-applied {{Information}} templates (until practice changes again in a few years), even if applying this formatting actually damaged the information content of the valid metadata already recorded. Remember, we're here for the observance of those guidelines and the edit counts, not for the content. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:54, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LMK if you find anymore. BTW I'd strongly suggest someone starts an RFC over the FSII bot, I found a few examples where it seemingly missed obvious sourcing. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:02, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

user:FSII seems to have behaved correctly in this case, the starting problem was applying an {{Information}} template and blanking the source field, when it had an obvious source already stated. If an unnecessary edit like that can't be made correctly, it shouldn't be made. The file was valid beforehand, without the template, it is not an improvement to "upgrade" to using the template if this also either breaks the metadata, or (as in this case) is likely to have the content deleted altogether. This is just one image that happened to be caught, because someone else was watching it. How many have had the same template problem added to them, then been auto-deleted silently afterwards?

Besides which, User:FSII claims to be an alternate account, not a 'bot (or at least not a 'bot that is used in this namespace). Andy Dingley (talk) 12:39, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying i'm not competent? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saying that this was clearly not a competent edit. How many like it do you think you've made? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried hard not to 'delete' information when trying to upgrade stuff to using {{Information}}, but given the number of edits made, I can't determine an exact error rate. In respect of the Viaduct image you mention, I'm now checking that contributors uploads for a similar situation. In my opinion when I filled out the information, the link between the author name and uploader name wasn't obvious to me, and I've had admins yell at me in the past for putting in 'assumed' sources, Perhaps ypu should have a word with the admins about that ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should have interpreted the "By" claim as either valid or invalid (a judgment call, as you note, but not the matter at issue here), then treated it as either a sourced image and recorded the source, or else as an unsourced image and tagged it immediately for deletion. As happened here, it was instead bundled into the description. That's clearly wrong (the subject was not the photographer) - it looks like the free-text parser you used to generate the template just wasn't up to the job of parsing such unstructured descriptions. That's no surprise - it's a hard problem.

I can't see any justification for converting free-text metadata into an {{Information}} template with mandatory fields left blank. Those become images that are then exposed to invisible 'bot erosion and deletion, as indeed happened here. If the {{Information}} can't be filled out fully immediately, that should be raised immediately as an issue (possibly for deletion) when at least there's some hope of human intervention. Leaving templates around with mandatory fields left blank is just asking the 'bots to delete them by default. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The documentation for information doesn't make it clear that 'source' is mandatory. Also as you previously raised an RFCU , the issue of CSD 'masscare' tagging for missing sources isn't uncontroversial. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:24, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If "source" really isn't mandatory (and as someone with vast numbers of CSDs, I'd expect you to know more about this than I do), then that's a clear, separate, issue with either FSII's behaviour or else the interpretation of the tag it added. {{di-no source}} is pretty clear that lack of "source" is a route to rapid automatic deletion.

Also, part of the reason for adding 'information' rather than an outright CSD tag, is because sometimes other image patrollers

find things I've missed. If you'd prefer 'massacre' CSD tagging LMK Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I'm not advocating adding CSD to images that don't warrant it

My point above is that any process of parsing free text metadata into a template should at least be rational and logically consistent. The text should be parsed and judged as either "adequate" or "inadequate", then any tagging that is necessary can be identified at that point and added at that point. If this can't be done cleanly for an image, then processing that image should be abandoned and no change should be made to that image - it's just too hard to do that one simply, so keep working on those that are.

We already know that free-text metadata is a problem, because it's not clear, and certainly not clear to dumb bots, whether it meets minimal requirements. For this reason, we don't run the dumb bots over such images, only if they have structured metadata that we accept can be either automatically assessed by dumb bots, or else is reasonable to tag for deletion. The template replacement process you're using here moves images from an "Unassessed, but not trivially taggable" state to potentially an "Unassessed, but now appearing to be bot-processable" state. Your change isn't changing much about the degree of sourcing, but it is moving images from the "too difficult to judge automatically" group to the "If a dumb bot doesn't like it, delete it" group. This is a risky process and should only be done if it is both useful, and adequately safe.

The business value that we gain by adding {{information}} templates is marginal at best. The risk of doing it increases significantly, if it also changes the image's status for then being judged by dumb bots. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:24, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've been reviewing the information additions, so far other than the one you mention above where it wasn't perhaps as clear

as it could be, I've not found uploads where information got lost. As you queried though, some images were given a slightly more in depth review, which meant a few that would otherwise have been 'robo-nuked' did ened up with enough information to enable them to be moved over to Commons (which is a good thing).

I don't consider my comment about massacre CSD tagging an attack, because it was not intended to be one. It was merely a statement of frustration, I'm sorry if you misread it. Previously, I would have CSD tagged images without a source, but others ( perhaps including yourself) asked me to back off on this in respect of older uploads, hence the approach of adding {[tl|information}} in the hope that by putting the images in process and leaving authorship requests on uploader talk page, some of the sourcing issues could be resolved. It's a shame that what was intended as a compromise position is know also seen as problematic. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:37, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The CSD and sourcing issue is a different one. We need (project can't work without it) a clear policy that says whether source is needed, not needed, or needed under some circumstances. Then we apply that policy. Any argument afterwards really comes down to respect for consensus, which I'm happy to grant.

As to what this policy should be, then IMHO this does depend on context. We need source where a different source could affect licensing issues. Images clearly old enough to be PD-old for any author don't need to show who that author was, and what their death date was. We do not need source if it doesn't affect licensing. No-one should care about source (to the level of deletion) unless licensing is also affected by it. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt you were trying to be helpful, but as we've discussed before and as others have commented above, if you can't fill in the author and source fields, it's better just to not add the information template because that just causes more problems. So are we agreed to stop doing that? postdlf (talk) 15:46, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to stop adding 'information' where I feel it's justified to do so. I'd rather not have to mark images lacking an obvious source as CSD's though.. Perhaps you and Andy could come up with a workable solution (like you did with the photos of art issue previously), I.E A template that keeps the dumb bots happy, but could be used to 'defer' a decison to someone more competent? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would say it's clearly not "justified" to add the template where you don't know how to fill in the author and source fields. postdlf (talk) 15:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doon school image[edit]

Hello!

I have just used the doon school logo image in Doon School page. Thanks for bringing it to my notice.

Merlaysamuel (talk) 06:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: What to do with respect to the copyright of countries with which the US does not have copyright relations?[edit]

This RfC discussing the above issue may be of interest to you. Dpmuk (talk) 16:46, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo details updated[edit]

I have added the details for the photo File:Thom hansen.jpg per your request. Please advise if there is something else that is needed. All rights to the photo are being released by me. Thanks, C. Williams (talk)

Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks#New task[edit]

Hello, I've started the task again under my bot trial, please comment on the issue of commemorative euro coins or query me on irc (QueenOfFrance). Regards, Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 15:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Podhalan POWs.jpg[edit]

Please stop contacting me regarding the files from poland.gov and its' related pages. I secured their permission to use the photos from their site in our Wiki ages ago. Someone here decided Wiki cannot treat their license as PD (their license states that PD is ok as long as the usage of the photo doesn't contradict the "aims of Polish foreign policy", whatever that means) -- and changed the license on all photos from {{PolandGov}} to {{fairuse}}. Contact them instead. //Halibu tt 13:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would love some help from an "experienced editor"![edit]

There's an image I uploaded (article: Ben Deily), that now bears this disclaimer:

"This image may not have the proper copyright or licensing information. An experienced editor should contact the uploader and add the proper tag, or discuss the issue on the talk page. If the image has no source, add {{di-no source|date=20 January 2012}}. If the image has no licensing information, add {{di-no license|date=20 January 2012}}. If the image may be non-free, please list at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images."

I own the image, and had tried to express that I was licensing it under Creative Commons...but I'm WAAAY out of my wikipedia depth here. Any notion of how it should be tagged to address the message above? Grateful for any help/advice! :-) Withnail68 (talk) 18:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paulmcanders[edit]

I would like your help for you to teach me the correct manner on how to edit pictures on wikidia please tell me what is the right licence to use when adding a picture about living people,DVD or Book cover so it will not be deleted is there a simple lay out to follow so this can be done? Because I don't want anymore of my picture to be deleted.

Here is what I did with File:Greatest Tank Battles.jpg is this what you want from now on to prevent any more picture being deleted?

Paulmcanders (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good! So does this mean that it won't be deleted and if I do it to the others they will not be deleted as well? Another thing what should I do about pictures involving living people? What is the procedure for adding a picture about them?

Paulmcanders (talk) 19:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May you please explain to me how I will be able to upload picture to wikipedia commons without them being deleted afterwards?

Paulmcanders (talk) 20:55, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article about Restaurant Week[edit]

Just wanted your feedback on a new article that I have created. Does it meet Wiki standards? Would appreciate your comments and feedback (and help!). Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Bangalore_restaurant_week Varunr (talk) 11:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old Dutch.gif[edit]

Hi, I've been offline for a few weeks. Apparently you tagged this very old image (public domain from the 1910's) that I'd uploaded several years ago as missing authorship information. My recollection is that the file had plenty of information as to source, but the page has since been deleted. The authorship, was obviously the Old Dutch Cleanser company, as it was from an advertisement put out by that company. It also included information about the current owner of the Old Dutch trademarks, but I no longer have it handy. I no longer have the time or inclination to mess with recreating the information that was there or do anything to make it clearer, and in any event no longer have the image to re-upload it. But if you get the page restored, I'll see if there's something I can do to fix it. Otherwise, I hope you will hunt up a replacement for the image of the Old Dutch logo so that it will remain in the encyclopedia to improve the article on "Dutch cap." Thanks. Crypticfirefly (talk) 06:05, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the problem! Crypticfirefly (talk) 00:59, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trains WP; No Image plaque[edit]

File:Project Trains no image.png is just a generic outline of an old locomotive and tender. How can this possibly be a copyright violation? ----DanTD (talk) 14:33, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) It wasn't deleted as a copyright violation, it was deleted because apparently no sourcing information was provided. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:44, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was that a new user removed {{PD-self}} and thereby leaving the file without a license. If a file from 2007 suddenly have no license I think you should check file history to see if a license was ever there. --MGA73 (talk) 13:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{PD-art}}[edit]

I noticed that you made this change. Note that Commons doesn't care about the copyright in the country of origin (see commons:COM:L#Interaction of United States copyright law and non-US copyright law under "Exception" and commons:Template:PD-Art), so moving that image to Commons is fine. However, users located in countries where it is copyrighted should maybe not move it themselves since they could face legal action. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite doi[edit]

Please withdraw your tfd of Template:Cite doi/10.1101.2F087969172.16.89. This is how {{cite doi}} works. There are thousands of these and they enable sharing of citations between articles. Alarbus (talk) 04:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image licensing[edit]

Hi, I know the copyright problems, but I'm not sure what template to use. The link here allows you to use it as a wallpaper, so it should be usable, shouldn't it? None of the licensing templates seem to fit it, so I'm not sure where to go from here. WP Randomno (talk) 12:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you did not reply, the file has already been deleted. I'm quite sure the it is the equivilent of this, but I am unsure which template that is on Wikipedia. Even if you recieve many image licensing questions, you could at least quickly write a link to a page which has further help and links to templates.

I hope you will reply, |Randomno| WP 10:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out a link was provided in the warning, actually. I don't really need that file any more, so in fact you don't need to reply. Thanks, |Randomno| WP 18:01, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image Copyright[edit]

So much for giving me a chance to defend the reason for the "Christian Rock Hard" image to remain uploaded... Every other article about a South Park episode has a snapshot, why isnt it okay for his one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Green-Halcyon (talk • contribs) 09:04, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re-tagging GIF[edit]

Hi, please see this image history. You agreed in October [1] that If there's no PNG original, then feel free to remove the tag, but please leave a note on the description so it doesn't get tagged by someone else. I did that but you still re-tagged it yourself, overlooking the note in the "Other" field. Please join the discussion at User talk:Fayenatic london#Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Good GIF. – Fayenatic L (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Circumstances can change. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure they can, so please point me to what's changed, because there's been no change at Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload and I haven't been following anything else that's relevant. I'm not pursuing this just for myself, but for newbies who won't understand the policy, especially if template messages don't fit the circumstances. File:YesAsia logo.gif is a 3KB file; how much more efficient or accurate would a vector image be? – Fayenatic L (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was following the reasoning in the TfD, previously I would have left the images alone. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to understand & update the wording within some of these templates, and the documentation on their pages, so that image newbies like me can more easily get the right point... Template:Should be PNG has a documentation page which currently says that this template should be used for GIFs that have lost colour depth, but not for size reduction. For GIFs downloaded directly from websites, e.g. File:YesAsia logo.gif, which have no loss of colour depth, it therefore seems that this the wrong template, and Template:Bad GIF would be more appropriate; do you agree? (Another editor agreed in the discussion on my talk page.) Alternatively, perhaps the template description could be made less prescriptive. – Fayenatic L (talk) 21:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of further reply, I have changed the tag. I also deleted the "other information" which I had entered after our discussion in October. – Fayenatic L (talk) 13:38, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of NCAA football programs at catholic colleges[edit]

Hi Sfan00 IMG. You added added unreferenced tag to article List of NCAA football programs at catholic colleges. I wrote the article by going through the existing articles:

and checking the schools's affiliation. The purpose of adding references is to directly support the information in an article. That can be done because every entry has a wikilink where to confirm if the school is catholic, and where their football program competes (as in those 4 lists I used, where reflist is only used in introductory paragraph). Thanks and best regards--Banderas (talk) 10:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nehru image[edit]

Hi! You recently put a tag here:- [File:Nehru in Kashmir House, Doon School.JPG] which says wrong license. But, you might haven't noticed but the copyright tag is given with the photo. It's copyright has expired (therefore, in public domain) as it was clicked in 1950. I'll be grateful if you can now remove the tag. Or if there is any other problem, please do let me know. Thanks! Merlaysamuel (talk) 10:49, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to re-format the NFUR into an information block Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to do that. Can you do it, if i may request?

Merlaysamuel (talk) 15:41, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Picture replacement[edit]

How do i delete an old picture once it has been replaced by a new version?Trafalk09 (talk) 13:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of brand name confectionery products (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Walkers

List of brand name food products (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jacobs

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Project Trains no image.png[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Mackensen (talk) 00:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Año nuevo en el Club Nautico (San Pedro, Buenos Aires).jpg listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect File:Año nuevo en el Club Nautico (San Pedro, Buenos Aires).jpg. Since you had some involvement with the File:Año nuevo en el Club Nautico (San Pedro, Buenos Aires).jpg redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:49, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of Animals Act 1934‎[edit]

You suggested that the Protection of Animals Act 1934‎ article could use an infobox. To the best of my knowledge there is no law or statute infobox. What infobox did you have in mind? --Bejnar (talk) 10:55, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:UK-LEG ext[edit]

Template:UK-LEG ext has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bots free us[edit]

Thanks for your help with updating the file names of the King-Crimson album-covers, which I had simplified to allow uniform display in categories and simplified expression in lists.

However, you should know the following: The file-mover apparatus informs us that a (ro)bot will update the first redirects automatically, and that we should worry only about secondary redirects.

Maybe my understanding of the bot's scheduling is optimistic, and I should join you in updating all the primary redirects (one each for the albums)?

Cheers, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:07, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that file redirect were now dealt with by a bot Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lynne Roberts[edit]

lynneroberts.jpg has the proper licensing. I made the photo 54 yrs ago and have had it in my possession since then. Therefore, I am removing tag. Schmausschmaus (talk)

Early statutes[edit]

Thank you for your message. I am afraid that I do not have a more complete list and I was hoping that you would be able to provide a source. James500 (talk) 13:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I am not able to access the page on the Internet Archive that you linked to. I assume that the original is on Google Books. Could you provide a link to that instead? James500 (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sfan00 IMG/vector.js[edit]

I don't know how I found it but, I found your vector.js page and I was curious what the middle section was for (starting with the "FurMeConfig". I know nothing of coding, but it looks like it could possibly be a helpful little piece. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:24, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Files with short filenames[edit]

Category:Files with short filenames, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Short filename[edit]

Template:Short filename has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

licensing for ValueLabs-logo.JPG[edit]

Hi,
I saw your tagging in the file page. Please help me through the proper licensing tag for the file. Thanks,
tausif 10:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:CensoredLink[edit]

Template:CensoredLink has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Roldan.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Roldan.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Image moved away from Commons Shadow

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:28, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Roldan.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Roldan.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:32, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:23rd Street.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:23rd Street.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:41, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Gypsum.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Gypsum.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:45, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Zorndorf.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Zorndorf.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:58, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Yordan Milanov.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Yordan Milanov.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:01, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Udderbelly.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Udderbelly.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Ursiny.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Ursiny.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:09, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Ust-Omchug-petrol.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Ust-Omchug-petrol.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:11, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:MDN Logo.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:MDN Logo.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:40, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Rabobank.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Rabobank.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:14, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Jura.PNG[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Jura.PNG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Firefly.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Firefly.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:41, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Ex voto.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Ex voto.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:21, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Inscriptions.JPG[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Inscriptions.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:30, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Forestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Forestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Daniel Santos.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Daniel Santos.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Sheepfold.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Sheepfold.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Pon de Replay Image[edit]

I did place the Pon de Replay image in Pon de Replay, but another user removed it stating it did not fit Wikipedia's non-free content criteria. Is there anything I can do about this? Plmnji (talk) 17:26, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{wrong license}} tag on File:OSU beavers.gif[edit]

You added the {{wrong license}} tag to File:OSU beavers.gif however I do not see the license issue. Please further explain your concern. --ben_b (talk) 10:41, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons showing through[edit]

Please do not write such. This is not valid English. Besides, we already have Template:Db-f8 for that occassion. A:-)Brunuś (talk) 13:08, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Supermarine S.5.jpg[edit]

Copy/edit form my talk page: "Thanks for uploading File:Supermarine S.5.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) 13:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)"

Hi Sfan, thanks for your note, I made a mistake in the title heading of the image. Is there a way to simply delete this image; another one replaces it (with the corrected title). FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Image Problem[edit]

I received this message, "Thanks for uploading File:Henry and the Clubhouse cover.jpg. The image description page curently 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."

After I downloaded that image and used it I got a message about it, saying things I didn't understand and didn't know how to fix. So I went back and downloaded a different image and replaced the first one. I didn't know I should remove the first one, and I don't know how to do that anyway. So it's fine with me if it's removed.Tlqk56 (talk) 16:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About your edit in my talk page.[edit]

Hi, In my talk page u mentioned that the below file is not in use. But it is now used in Facebook. That image is very helpful to understand how a facebook timeline looks like..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Facebook_Timeline_07_April_2012.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayabharat (talk • contribs) 16:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Jessica Drew (Earth-700459) 002.jpg[edit]

I ask you to help me!File:Ультиматум.jpg and File:Jessica Drew (Earth-700459) 002.jpg. Put the image in the article Jessica Drew! I locked! Instead of just words, I want to explain how it looks Ultimate Spider Woman. =(--Hawnee94 (talk) 17:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Mohaww Data Sciences, Inc. Logo.gif[edit]

Yes, please get rid of it. I misspelled the name and couldn't figure out how to delete it myself. Anyway I found a better version that's usable under the terms of use. Peter Flass (talk) 18:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shemar Moore as Malcolm[edit]

Hi there, I realize that File:Shemar Moore as Malcolm is currently not in any articles, but I want to put it on Malcolm Winters but every time I put "File:Shemar Moore as Malcolm Winters" in the image place it claims that the file doesn't exist, even when I search it. Do you know why this is happening? Can you let me know as soon as possible? Thanks. Creativity97 (Talk) 01:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph File:2012modelsreduced.JPG[edit]

The photograph is being used in this article :

Nuestra Belleza Latina 2012

Trafalk09 (talk) 02:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done![edit]

Done! The problems with File:Soni and Chicky.jpg have been solved!--Jagadhatri(২০১২) 04:07, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done! The problems with File:IGATE patni to iGATE.jpg have been solved!--Dineshkumar Ponnusamy 08:58, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

RE: Orphaned non-free image File:Castle technology ltd logo.png[edit]

Hello, ShakespeareFan00. You have new messages at Trevj's talk page.
Message added -- Trevj (talk) 10:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

File:ValueLabs-logo.JPG/ May'12[edit]

Hi,
This file is not used in the article. Instead a different file is being used. Hence, I believe this page may be deleted.
Thanks,
tausif 12:16, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haltonhills logo bw.gif[edit]

Thanks for the message. The above file was replaced in Halton Hills by a colour version that was submitted by another user. I have no objection to the b/w version being deleted.Raellerby (talk) 13:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Orphaned non-free image File:Cover of the Winter 1999 issue of Living Bird magazine.jpg[edit]

For some unknown reason, this image file won't load from the infobox in the Living Bird article. I've checked and double-checked and cut-and-pasted the file name to be sure I hadn't misspelled but it still won't load. Please go ahead and delete the file. When I have time, I'll find and upload a new and perhaps better image for the article. DocTree (talk) 15:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mass effect non-free image deletion[edit]

I got your message. Yes, I myself removed the image from the article because I found another non-free image that I thought better presented the topic in question. So I'm ok with its deletion. Plastelin (talk) 21:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may freely delete the images[edit]

Hello, ShakespeareFan00. You have new messages at Jobin RV's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ref: Jannat 2 Poster[edit]

File:Jannat 2 Teaser Poster.jpg is a Bollywood movie poster. Movie posters are free to use and in the public domain and supports and strengthens the quality of the article

Hello, ShakespeareFan00. You have new messages at Mokshjuneja's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ir-MedScan[edit]

Template:Ir-MedScan has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:49, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thaandavam film poster.jpg/May '12[edit]

Hi,
A different file is being used in the article for film poster. So, I believe this file better be deleted.
Thanks,
tausif 05:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Orphaned non-free image File:Everyday People Cartoon.gif[edit]

The image in question was originally pointing to Everyday People Cartoons and placed at the creators request, but has since been replaced with an image uploaded by the pseudonym account of the creator: File:Everyday People Cartoon 439.gif. There are no broken links, so it seems reasonable to speedy delete. Thanks for the input. DJSparky ^huh? 18:18, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What the?[edit]

I gave licensing for those images. (by the way, I don't play Club Penguin anymore). Be peaceful. Be a Dalai Lama. (talk) 23:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image:TheMiernikDossier.jpg[edit]

I have removed the image from author's article, it remains only at book's article, per licensing template for fair use of book covers. I added short explanation at image page. That should be ok now. Kraxler (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:TalesToAstonish64splash.jpg[edit]

Hi, Sfan. First, sincere thanks for helping to tackle the issue of overuse of copyrighted art on Wikipedia. Secondly, the image File:TalesToAstonish64splash.jpg is not orphaned — it is used at Leon Lazarus — but it does need a fair-use rationale. I suspect you simply inserted the wrong template on my talk page. No worries. I'll supply a FUR. With regards, Tenebrae (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Intel_Corporation_Logo,_1891.jpg[edit]

I discovered http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Intel_Corporation_Logo,_1891.jpg is actually a duplicate and can be deleted. Peter Flass (talk) 12:52, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stupidmosquitothing.png[edit]

I'm pretty cool if you delete it now; I can't remember what I was going to use it for tbh. Egg Centri c 23:20, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Year of the Jackpot Galaxy 03-52.jpg[edit]

Thank you for finally getting round to my criminal mistake of 6 years ago! However, per section 2 of my talk page I don't give a rodentanus what happens to pictures I might have posted when bureaucracy did not rule the day. Thank you and good night. Djdaedalus (talk) 13:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are requested to apologise for your objectionable language, but your comments are noted. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:53, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Coat of arms of the Eurogendfor.jpg[edit]

Hi there, as you can check, the file is now used, the only problem is that another used replaced the correct one (Coat of arms of the Eurogendfor.jpg) with another one (Coat of arms of the Eurogendfor.svg) wich the factual accuracy, as you can see on the sources linked on the info template, is completely far from the original one! Thank you. --Nicola Romani (talk) 10:39, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

your automatic tagging[edit]

I see no reason for you to go rampaging about tagging every single image article that doesn't have certain information on it. The cover of an issue of Spiderham has been on Wikipedia for six and a half years, and the cover for Ultima X Odyssey has been around for 5 and a half years. The purpose of nominating something for deletion is because you don't believe it meets the requirements for inclusion for Wikipedia, not because it was uploaded at a time before they asked for fair usage rational. You are not helping the Wikipedia by doing this. Please take a moment to actually look at the images before tagging them for deletion. If its clearly the cover art for a comic, book, film, album, game, or whatnot, then obviously its allowed, no need to bother it. Dream Focus 14:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the time it took you to complain you could have added the required infromation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not every single image out there has someone still around to notice. Thus many things may get deleted that shouldn't be. And these things are all just copy and paste rational for the same sort of things. Dream Focus 14:36, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So you oppose having CSD ? Please submit an alternative proposal that works :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:37, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did. You actually LOOK at the thing before trying to prod it, and then copy and paste the default rational on it. That way you can help Wikipedia, instead of trying to deleting things that obviously should be here. Dream Focus 14:40, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are implying that the CSD criteria are not objective then ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:41, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anything can be misused. See WP:Bureaucracy Dream Focus 14:53, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW If you feel strongly about NOT deleting things - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_reports/Non-free_files_missing_a_rationale. Plenty of stuff to be kept ;) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Dream Focus is suggesting that you spend a few seconds to add the rationale instead of just tagging the files. At least for files where it is easy to add one.

It would be possible to use a bot to tag all files on Wikipedia:Database reports/Non-free files missing a rationale. But I agree that it would be better to add a rationale than just to tag the files. An alternative approach would be to add uploader to the list so we could add a list of all files uploaded by (active) user x in one edit. --MGA73 (talk) 15:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which was what I was doing for logos and so on ;). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:54, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Woah![edit]

Whats going on here: [2] removed license? -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see you fixed it. Thanks. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:17, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm running a check back on all simmilar edits, as well ! :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:18, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eurogendfor, again[edit]

Hi there, I was forced to rollback again [3], to me the file proposed, as stated before, is totally different from the original one, and as per WP:OR I've replaced that image with a non-free rationale image that is the exact badge used by the Eurogendfor. Wikipedia policies allows the use of this kind of files, that badge is a distinctive symbol of an organization, not some family coat of arms which should be presented as somebody want in heraldry. For this reasons I've reverted the page with the previous file. --Nicola Romani (talk) 04:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao! please have a look here [4], the user violate the Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule, probably (I suppose) he asked the deletion of that badge after his 3rd edit, orphaning the image. As stated before, the logo proposed by that user is completely different (see the sources of the deleted image) and he knows it, for this reasons it fall under WP:OR, I'm here to ask you to restore the deleted image, protecting the page by further edit wars. Thank you in advance. --Nicola Romani (talk) 15:00, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pieve Vergonte[edit]

What did you do at Pieve Vergonte? Did you notice the article began with a Welcome?!? And are you sure you really own the copyright of the host of images yuo're adding? I'll notify your case to some administrator. --'''Attilios''' (talk) 15:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, In relation to the article, I'll have another look at it. The action undertaken was IIRC to remove a template which was not for use in Article space.

Secondly, I'm not adding any images, so I don't understand the second part of your comment. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:57, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Zomato-logo.png[edit]

Hi,
Please delete the file [[File:Zomato-logo.png]], as it is not being used in any article anymore. A new and a better version of the logo is being used in the article Zomato.
Thanks,
tausif(talk) 09:14, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TB[edit]

Hello, ShakespeareFan00. You have new messages at Gilderien's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Done--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 11:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding non-free licences[edit]

I've seen edits like this on several occasions and wonder what your thinking is. By removing the "no licence" tag and replacing it with a non-free licence but failing to add a fair-use rational means that someone else must come back to the image and tag it as missing the WP:FURG. In my opinion your edit is unproductive as whole. It would be better, if you want to add a non-free licence that you also add the missing rational tag at the same time. If you did that I, or another editor, would not have to return to the image to retag it a second time. Please consider this option in terms of productivity overall. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 21:32, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Categories nominated for deletion[edit]

Hello, I've nominated two categories that you created for deletion, at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 June 7#Category:Pages containing subscription only links or citations. Toohool (talk) 23:42, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Notoriginal[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:Notoriginal, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

See talk page...

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hawnee94[edit]

You can choose which of these skins can be downloaded in article Ultimate Spider Woman? .--90.155.142.140 (talk) 01:46, 9 June 2012 (UTC) http://www.tumblr.com/blog/hawnee94[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

Thank you for your edits to the Shorne page. I should have done this myself. I am aware of some of the shortcomings in the item and will address them as time permits. Meanwhile, I would value any other observations you care to make.

Panjigally (talk) 08:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you again. I shall look out for these ambiguities from now on. Panjigally (talk) 09:00, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

mecca[edit]

Just so you know I only used that word because that's how they described it rather than me trying to make some odd political point! :-) --Cameron Scott (talk) 18:58, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, Do you have a direct cite for it, such as in the Channel 4 website items? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

see here --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:21, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah , Thanks... If it was a direct quote, I can see why you thought it was relevant. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right but as you say, given recent events in the UK might be best to avoid it. --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:56, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Un-imagewhoops[edit]

Template:Un-imagewhoops has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:29, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Uw-ilc[edit]

Template:Uw-ilc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:33, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]