User talk:Moeron/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

1/2/07 Phish edits

I somewhat rashly rv'd a Phish edit, but wondering your thoughts on the editor's change .... BabuBhatt 23:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I made a comment on the users page here. Thanks for the heads-up and cheers to you and yours in 2007! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 00:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I was too rash, went about it the wrong way, not the best attitude for editing and teaching someone else ... nappy new year. BabuBhatt 00:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: Mathew Fletcher

Thanks for the heads up :). I shall do my best to present a case for the article's deffence, but will be prepared to accept the outcome whatever the case. Besides, it's the only article I've had a large part in the creation of. Pity that other user never came back with the sources.

I would like to ask though, what is the time scale for the voting? I.E. When's the deadline?

Thanks

Reverieuk 02:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Further to previous comment, I had this emailed to me:
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/196/fletchershrink2oo8.jpg (appologies for the level of JPEG compression, but I couldn't get it hosted otherwise; a better quality is available if it helps)
which appears to be the inside-page spread of the EDP, 17th November 2006.
Although I cannot confirm its authenticity personally, it looks perfectly ledgit, and has many important quotes supporting the case for {WPBio}, including:
'...working with the Anthony Nolan Trust across many fundraising events.'
'The young man was an inspiration ' - on the subject of the Regatta and subsequent registering of every member of the U16s Sudbury Rugby Team on the bone marrow donors register.
'...throughout his life, which he spent raising awareness for his illness...'
--Reverieuk 16:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
You should mention this at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mathew Fletcher. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 18:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Very well. I just thought I'd mention it on here first, as I believe you said you personally needed to verify offline sources. --Reverieuk 19:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The January 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 19:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, so are you

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Gwernol 00:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

What are you doing?

You messed it up, the intro. I think you remeber me. Here we go again. --Donut Shop Worker 00:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean. Can you please clarify? -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 00:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Dave Mustaine

Who are you to just remove fair use images?--E tac 06:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Moeron your user name really fits you well, as you are the one repeatedley removing fair use images. --E tac 23:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
"Wikipedia permits the "fair use" of copyrighted material only if the image or content is, in essence, not reasonably repeatable; that is, it would not be possible to replace the image or content with an equivalent free image." Also, those images that do pass this must have "a detailed fair use rationale". At this point in time, it is VERY probable to go to a concert and take a picture of the person in question, therefore fair use images on such a page should not be used. Make sure to read WP:FU#Images and WP:V before uploading any more images that may be considered "promotional". If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Cheers! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 23:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Thats ridiculous, why should someone have to take a photo at a concert when the group offers free promotionial pictures that qualify as fair use on Wikipedia. It seems to me like somone is just going on a power trip here. --E tac 23:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
In response to your comment on my talk page: images such as those that are consider promotional are still under scrutiny of copyright violation issues. The resolve for such things, other than obtain your own WP:GFDL image, is to request for permission from the band/person in question. This may be overlooked if the page(s) provide a statement where any pictures on the site can be used under free distribution. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 23:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Well for one the issue in question is a high school yearbook photo, how many yearbooks have copyrights? --E tac 00:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, before we would even consider copyright issues with the yearbook picture, we would have to address that it didn't come their official site, but from http://www.rattleheadhq.com , which is a fan page. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 00:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Stop removing my fair use images

You are in violation of WP:STALK leave my work alone! --E tac 00:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

As I said on your talk page, please do not add images into pages that the uploader has the label template:musicpromo-screenshot unless it is being used as critical commentary on the show, movie, ect. in question. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 00:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Its not from a movie, its a music promotional pic taken of a live performance, now leave it the hell alone, see WP:POINT, and stop following me, see WP:STALK --E tac 00:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

And take note when you upload using that template it says music promo or screenshot of a video, maybe wiki should change that to avoid confusion --E tac 00:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

An you should take note that the template reads "This image is a screenshot from a copyrighted music video or promotional video" and the image can only be used as "identification and critical commentary on the music video in question". -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 00:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

You do realise the pat robertson article includes commentary on the 700 club, seriusly stop violating WP:POINT --E tac 00:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Neurosurgery Spammer

User:Neurosurgery is probably a sock puppet for our friend User:Lifeinneurosurgery who was recently blocked for repeated link spamming (Special:Contributions/Lifeinneurosurgery). Is it possible to block this account as well? Nposs 00:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

That should be a possibility. My suggestion is to notify the blocking admin, TigerShark (talk · contribs). Cheers! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 01:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I notified TigerShark (talk · contribs) at User talk:TigerShark#Sockpuppets. If other stuff comes up before they can take care of it, let me know and I will see what I can do. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 01:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Ghost Of A Fallen Age IMAGE Pr9541.jpg

I emailed the band's email at ghostofafallenage@gmail.com and he told me he'd put up a statement at the bottom of the "About Ghost Of A Fallen Age" section of www.myspace.com/ghostofafallenage He said that I'm free to use what every came off the myspace and their homepage for wiki type pages such as this and www.Last.fm I just went and checked the myspace and he put the statement there. Thanks for checking.

-- Noregret1 05:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Eh? Lack of fair-use rationale?

Why'd you mark http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Snow%28M%C3%A4r%29.jpg for speedy-deletion? I see nothing wrong here. - The Norse 20:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The image is lacking a fair use rationale. Also, it is not tagged for speedy-deletion until seven days from now if there is no rational placed on the page. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 20:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I still don't understand, why is that image different from the rest of the similar character images in that article? - The Norse 21:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I will look into all of the other images, but it looks like they fall under this same problem. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 21:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd like it if you didn't, as there's no problem. Character pictures that correspond with the characters being described in articles are commonplace. - The Norse 22:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting

Thank you for the continued reversion of the Phish page. Unfortunately, I am going to have to report you to Gwernol for excessive edits of other people's material that is relevant to the page. Please use the discussion pages to comment on proposed deletions you have for this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.163.45.199 (talk) 15:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC).

Well, fame at last I guess. As far as I know I haven't edited the Phish article or had any contact with that IP, so I suppose I'm flattered to be mentioned :-) You've done the right thing by moving the discussion to the talk page. If a proper reliable source for that paragraph can be found I don't see any particular reason not to have it in the article, but you are right that is does need sources. Gwernol 21:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Moeron, Thank you for welcoming me to the Wiki community. I did at first think it was an automatically-generated reply, but there was something too sincere about it, so I followed your link, and was able to a quick glance at some of the things you've done - impressed! Be that as it may, I promise to read through all the stuff you've given me as recommended reading - here I was, happily adding commas to other people's articles and I suddenly find myself up to the whachamacallit! Oh, well. Tea break over, back on 'our 'eads! Thanx once again, and keep up the good work! Technopat 09:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

image of Theocracy

You want me to get permission from the Matt himself that the image is ok to be used here? because I can do that, otherwise stop following me and putting unneccesary tags on images. --E tac 18:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that would be great. Just following the instructions on the image page or at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Cheers! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 18:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

What if the photo is not copyrighted? --E tac 09:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you take a brief moment to look at something for me?

I just noticed Tomkurts (talk · contribs) adding an image(self-uploaded) that was tagged as a postage stamp. It looks like a promo shot to me which makes the tag a bit of a white lie. I haven't looked any further into the users image uploads. The editor is quite prolific, I'd hate to see them get into the bad habit of trying to "backdoor" pics onto Wiki and shade policy. If you can concur that the pic is falsely tagged then it will be easy to simply ask an admin to provide a "polite reminder" to the user to be careful with image licensing. Thanks, cheers and take care! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 14:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. I am guessing you mean Image:Modernringo.jpg. My first concern would be the source of the image; if you respect the editor enough, I would suggest first asking the user politely on their talk page about where they got it instead of throwing the template:nsd tag up right away. Then the next step would be confirming it is a stamp. If they say it is a stamp they scanned, bring it to an admins attention and maybe try searching the internet for the image, since it looks too nice digitally. If a source is provided, and it is a stamp, they will still need to provide a WP:FU rationale (I use the template:nrd). That would be my course of action and, depending on the outcome, I would look into the users other image uploads to make sure about other tags that have been used. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 18:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Your Pathetic Nomination of Veronia A.

Why the hell nominate the article of VA for deleltion you fool! Now look what you've caused. I'm trying my hardest to keep the bad language down, but I can hardly keep it back, so all I'm going to say is, just wait. You retard! Do you realise what you've done! And don't even try and add tinsult to injury and say it didn't comply with any shit because you'll just get it more. You.... I'm not going to get myself blocked. Where do you live. I'll come from any place on Earth. If you don't get the admins. to put it back up, then let's just say, it won't be nice for you, and if they can't do that, then it's over. And there's nothing that can block me from what I've said! I'm not going to go into details with all the hard work and history gone into that article from me. Thinking about it just pisses me off more. You're a fuckin' online stalker, watchin' over all the article I do, I was going to say something earlier but didn't in the end, trying to fuck-up everything I do, when I'm better than you in every last way. Tell me where you live or where you mainly situate if that's somewhere else, or get the article back up! Your choice. And don't even think about sayin' the right thing was done....!!!! MAZITO - Friday, 12 January, 2007; 01:11 (GMT)

Image:Beckett Piccolo vs. The Hulk

I added a rationable to the description page if you think it needs something else in there just tell me. You might like to see the Family Guy page it has a few of those rationable lacking images. --Dark Dragon Flame 00:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me now. I will check that page if I get the chance. Cheers! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 00:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

MBM image and other images you imperialistically delete

if there was a fair use image you should assume it would already be up. it is not unlikely that fans have taken pics themselves, however they respectively own the copyrights and none have been found which are GNU. rather than blindly assuming there are GNU images out there, you should first consider a)there probably isnt since fans usually only GNU a pic when added to wikipedia b)some people might not want to GNU their photos and removing promo pictures is merely an attempt to coerce them to do so. --AlexOvShaolin 20:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

First, I can't delete anything; I don't have those powers. As far as the last word on whether an image is replaceable or not, that is the choice of the deciding admin. If he figures that it is unreplaceable, then that is perfectly fine with me. Until then, I believe that but most bands that actively perform and celebrities that appear in public are able to be photographed be anyone. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 20:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image query

The license tag present of the image is designed for software screenshots, which would indicate it being incorrect to start with, and I get the feeling that the uploader would not be in the position to verify permission. In any case, the tag hould be replaced with fair use (due to the originally incorrect license tag, and the (presumed) copyrighted, rights withheld, status of the image), and a replaceable notice added to allow process to (eventually) do its work. Thanks, Martinp23 21:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

did not make changes, but wikipedia said i did

hi ron,

today I was looking at wikipedia, looking up some things on the russian revolution. At the top of my page there was a note saying that I had "new messages (last change)." I found a note from you and 5-6 others that said I had made changes to pages that I have not visited, nor had edited. I was wondering if you could tell me more about how something like that could happen. Is it possible that since I access this computer via work at a school, that a student or someone could hack in and post on wikipedia using my IP address? It's odd, the activity is all within the past few months. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.54.248.130 (talk) 16:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

It is possible, since it is a school/university, that the IPs aren't unique. This means that multiple people can use the same IP address over the web, which could lead to people vandalising. I have asked for someone to see if this is the case at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#IP asking for assistance on my talk page. On a side note, if you feel like you would like to contribute to Wikipedia and not have to deal with vandal incrimination, feel free to WP:REGISTER your own username. Cheers! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 18:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Why thank you very much! Somedays it's frustrating as hell coming here. But I'm old and retired(semi) and hobbies aren't supposed to be dull anyways :) . Thanks again Moe! Cheers and take care! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 19:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

theocracy image

This is getting a little ridiculous, the last image was a free use image and had a link to direct authorization of the band stating that it was and it was deleted anyways with no reason given, and now ths one is a public image found on flicr as the page said and you still feel the need to claim it is a coppyright violation. --E tac 22:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if this all seems unjust, but it is about being safe and adhering to the photographers rights. You can search Flickr for images that can be used here, under the Creative Commons, by doing and advanced search here and checking the box near the bottom that says "Only search within Creative Commons-licensed photos." Again, you should try and contact the user and ask if he will release one of the images under the GFDL/CC agreement. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 23:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I am still confused about why the first image was deleted, I recieved no explanation after I showed that the image was FREE use. --E tac 23:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the admin who deleted that one was Angr (talk · contribs), so maybe if you ask them, they can tell you more. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 00:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

SEGA creeping in behind the block?

I noticed the Wishbone Ash edit. Also take note of Sillyputty1 (talk · contribs) contributions. Something foul there. Of SEGA's 3 main IP pipes only 2 were blocked. I suspect his sporadic access through the third IP will show up periodically. Fun stuff! Cheers! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 12:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Also going to watch Mahav (talk · contribs). -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 08:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Add another one Moe. Keep an eye on TVMan11 (talk · contribs). Cheers! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 04:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I am currently dealing with another one, possibily; Solohann (talk · contribs). -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 04:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Pics

Hey Moe! IF you have a minute could you take a look at the recent uploads of this user. With everything I've seen around here as far as images go...my AGF towards "self mades" is very very thin. Is there an admin who's keen on image "truthiness"? I know a couple of users who check them full time but they are either busy, breaking or blocked. Just wondering. Cheers and take care! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 21:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Your fast! So who's the 'schoolmarm' to alert to this editor and his "errors?" ? Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 01:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I think you should possibly just list these at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion with my links provided and call them copyvios. The thing with IFD is that it is usually always backlogged, so an admin might not get to for a week or so. If you don't want to go through that process, I can list them tomorrow. Otherwise, I will pop over and support your listing. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 01:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I've got "Wiki-policy/formality burnout"(actually a killer head cold) I am just going to leave this tab open and I'll try to zip back and list them tomorrow. Thanks for the legwork. I am overdue for a Wiki-break so I may be very scarce for a week or 2(or 3). Good luck with all the "Wiki-loons" Moe. Take care! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 02:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

NRFB - Image

The image complies with the Wikipedia the fair use criteria in that

  1. No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information.
  2. The picture is not being used in a manner that would likely replace the original market role of the original copyrighted media - the picture is currently only available from the band's myspace website (although is likely to also be available on the band's offical website which is currently under construction)
  3. The picture has been published on the band's offical myspace website.
  4. The picture only relates to the article describing the band, its history, members (which the picture illustrates) & discography
  5. The picture meets the media-specific policy requirements.
  6. The picture is to be used in the article on the band.
  7. The picture contributes significantly to the article (e.g. clearly identifies the subject of an article). The image is only being used in the article namespace. It is not linked, nor inlined, from the talk pages
  8. The image or media description page contains:
  • Proper attribution of the source of the material.
  • An appropriate fair use tag indicating which Wikipedia policy provision permitting the use is claimed.

The picture is one of several prictures that the band has had taken for promotional press releases - there are currently no other free equivalent images of the band available - the image is only being used in respect to an article on the band Dan arndt 05:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_talk:Nrfb.jpg"


The problem is it is break rule number one, which is the most important one; someone can capture this band/group at a show/concert quite easily since the band performs live on a regular basis and freely release it. Also, the pictures section of the Myspace page is only available to people who sign up for myspace, which is another problem. Finally, the band must label the appropriate picture to be released under the GFDL but, again, since this is a band that currently performs, this image is replaceable. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 18:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I guess I would have to disagree in that as the picture is a promotional picture released by the band it does constitute a freely available image of the band - and based on your 'narrow' interpretation almost all images on wikipedia would have to be removed. At this stage there are no other 'free' images of the band available - given that most venues actively discourage or prohibit the taking of pictures or video it becomes extremely unlikely that someone could/would take a picture of the band performing live and then mave it freely available - I would contend that the best source of any image of a band is directly from the band itself - which is the case here Dan arndt 23:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_talk:Nrfb.jpg"

weird stuff going down

Greetings Moeron, Sorry for bugging you with my own "problems" when I'm sure you just want to be out there reading up on interesting stuff, but I'm turning to you as a first resort with something that as just occurred. I've just come across the following tidbit on my watchlist:

(diff) (hist) . . m Stevie Wonder‎; 16:27 . . (+29,509) . . FrancoGG (Talk | contribs) (JS: Reverted edits by 66.222.19.10 to last version by Technopat)

If you have time to check it out, it's pretty clear on the history page. Not quite sure of the implications, or what to do about it - maybe it's just a statistical hiccough and as such, nothing to worry about. Any recommendations/suggestions/comments? Thanx for being out there! Technopat 23:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

What happened was that 66.222.19.10 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) edited the page in a vandal-like manner with this edit, replacing the page with nonsense. FrancoGG (talk · contribs) then used a program (see WP:POPUPS or WP:SCRIPTS) to rollback that IPs edit to the last version that was correct; in this case, that correction was yours. In short, everything is all good on the Stevie Wonder page again and there is no worries. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. Cheers! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 23:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Moeron - many thanx for your prompt reply. Your matter-of-fact attitude leads me to the conclusion that there's naught to worry about. Is this something that I will come across often on my travels through Wikipedia? Cheers. Technopat 23:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I've got to hand it to you

I tell you, I've really got to hand it to you man. First of all, if you ever really thought you could ban me, well...forget it. But I must say, all I and all of your detractors (and I see there are many) have ever, ever asked of you, is this: if you suddenly claim (as if you're some sort of administrator) that an image is replaceable, that you get off your mega-editing ass and find a god damn image that suits your Nazi attitude, then no one would ever have a problem with you. Now, Anger22 is a very bored individual, seeing that he's 98 years old and has no friends, so he's started up this gay relationship with you, which is fine by me. NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT. But as long as you understand that images BENEFIT Wiki articles, then we definitely agree. It's very very nice to see that instead of hitting the edit button every chance you get, you are actually finding images that suit your unfair, OCD demands, even though many of the ones you erase pertain to FU more than the ones you replace them with. Congrats on finally understanding why everyone hates you, and finally doing something about it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BadBRains111 (talk • contribs) 01:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

Re: SEGA

Hmm... that is troublesome. As a checkuser clerk, I don't have access to the same information the checkusers themselves do. I'll see if I can inquire about the blockability factor, off-wiki, but I wouldn't get my hopes too far up. I'll look into this a bit more and see if I can tag a few pages for myself to watch for this sort of thing -- you're free to make another checkuser request or let me know if you need help, in the meantime (if requesting IP blocking in particular, I'd recommend the IP check section at the bottom). Apologies for the delayed reply, I'll try to keep an eye on this. Luna Santin 20:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I will keep these comments in mind. Cheers! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 20:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Novels newsletter : Issue IX - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 16:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Grow Up!

I don't think I need to say anymore.--E tac 06:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

What seems to be the problem? -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 06:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
You following this article around and putting it up for deletion for no reason, go look around for articles of other bands who have played at ProgPower they all have articles, you know why, because any band that plays there is very notable for a prog/power band. I wonder what your true motive is for doing this.--E tac 06:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Also they are a Christian metal band nonetheless, a genre that is normally thought to not be able to hack it with the secular acts, yet Theocracy is one of the top up and coming bands in their genre and playing in the most notable festival for it.--E tac 06:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding images on Bruce Hornsby

I'm really glad to have encountered you, Moeron, as I have been a big fan of your edits on the Grateful Dead article. I need help. Using the image of String Cheese Incident on jam band as a template (obviously it is dubious that that very famous band photographer uploaded the photo himself), I have uploaded these images from www.bruuuce.com as per written permission having been granted by Si Twining, the owner and operator of the site and owner of the copyrights to the images in question. Twining has granted permission for the images to be used on Wikipedia in the Bruce Hornsby article. As I know that you are a very dedicated editor of the Grateful Dead page, I was hoping that you might assist me in properly documenting these images...since it appears that my use of the image from the jam band article as a template might have been the wrong template to choose, to say the least. Sorry for the inconvenience...only trying to improve the article. (Feel free to reply on my talk page). Best...Snidleysnide 21:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. For the time being, I have left the images that I feel are suitable for the article uploaded. Hopefully correcting my apparent mistagging will be something we can accomplish smoothly and easily. Si made his intentions clear, that he was very enthusiastic about the images being uploaded. Your advice is much appreciated, as the Hornsby article has had some difficulty getting images attached (mainly problems with other users). Snidleysnide 21:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

commented on at User talk:Snidleysnide#Bruce Hornsby images. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 21:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I've just emailed Si the suggested form letter, and I'll forward that to the Wikipedia folks upon his response. I know I'm meant to post a notice on the image pages after forwarding the response to Wikipedia, but is there anything else to do just yet? By the way, while were at it, are the album cover images on the Hornsby article done properly? Thanks Snidleysnide 22:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

One more quick question, terribly sorry. I've just received the confirmation note from Si granting permissions (great news!) for the Hornsby images. I'm poised to contact Wikipedia, and I understand that I need to tag the image pages with an "awaiting ticket" note...in the meantime, since I evidently mistagged the copyright on the images to begin with (they were uploaded as if I were the photographer, as you pointed out), which specific copyright tagging should I change that to? (Or is that something that will be reviewed and taken care of when I contact Wikipedia with the request/confirmation notes). Thank you so very much, your patience and support in dealing with this is greatly appreciated! Snidleysnide 23:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I have the confirmation of permissions, and I am awaiting your further advice regarding changing the copyright tagging before sending my request and my confirmation to Wikipedia. Thanks Snidleysnide 20:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I'm not a sock puppet, and I have been nothing but sincere and cordial to you. It hurts me that you took time to contribute comments to the sock puppet accusation before answering how the images should be tagged. Please respond to me so that I can submit the request/confirmation to Wikipedia. Snidleysnide 21:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Uh, I was adding neutral information. This gives the admin evidence here to show that you are doing nothing but being careful about the images you upload to Wikipedia, which is a focus point of the RFC. If I was condoning it, I would have put Support in the comments secion, but I didn't. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 21:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry. It just feels pretty bad to be accused. I tried putting the Help tag on my talk page but it didn't create a usable link. My question is what tag should I apply to the images NOW, right NOW...then I will send the email to Wikipedia as the instructions direct. I'll also leave a note on the image page saying that Wikipedia has been contacted, etc...but I want to tag the images correctly first (you had indicated that I tagged the images as if I were the photographer, which I am not claiming to be). Snidleysnide 21:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't wish to crowd you page with this matter, but, for the record, I have no idea who User: Snidleysnide is, but I'm happy that images seem to have finally found a home on the Bruce Hornsby article. Thanks for the part you played in that. BoaTeeth 02:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that I've gotten the image situation sorted out. I got feedback from User:Mecu on my talk page which was very helpful, and I've independently reconfirmed the use and the current image tagging, including the language used in the reason for public domain. I've sent the reconfirmation to m:OTRS, and I had already sent the permissions to m:OTRS...so, as far as I can tell, things should be all systems go...right? Obviously, I second the thanks from User:BoaTeeth...you've been a big help. Snidleysnide 19:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Tenney, Minnesota

Your feedback please: is Tenney, Minnesota ready for peer review? Or does it require such an extensive rewrite that I should just start over? I'm having a moment of authorial insecurity due to the fact that my main source for historical information is an uncredited, unpublished history booklet prepared for the centennial in 1985.Spottacus 23:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia value of two Dead bootlegs

Hello Moeron, I must say I truly love your taste in music, we have much in common. I'm pretty new here, and I have a question about the Wikipedia content value of a couple of Dead bootlegs that I own on vinyl. Uncle John's Band - Palais de Seine, 1974 & one entitled "Garcia's Gang" from I believe 1980. In general what is the Wikipedia status for "bootlegs"? Thanks a lot Rpgman456 05:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Phish audio

Hey, moe.ron! Long time, no... whatever....
Um, when I was last around here, I know that you had mentioned that you were looking to convert some Phish audio to ogg. I was just wondering whatever became of that. I have software that will allow me to both cut the audio and convert it (at least, I think I do....), but, unlike seemingly every other fan out there, my collection is somewhat limited. I'd be more than happy to do all the technical legwork, maybe you, myself and Babu can put our Phishheads together and figure out what should be in the article. (I saw that someone added the Simpsons tease.... Nice....)
Anyway, I just made an unreasonable number of edits to the article, and think I might be done for the night. LMK.
—  MusicMaker 08:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes

So, for the record, you are Frank Stevens, you took all of these Momemnt End photographs and you posted this memo above in November 2000? -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 00:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
YES. Please email me at phactorystevens@yahoo.com with any further questions. I will be happy to answer anything you inquire about. FrankStevens2007 01:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

album covers

Alum cover = fair use, as the tag says... what more do you want? —Preceding unsigned comment added by E tac (talk • contribs)

I replied to your talk page. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 02:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I did provide a fair use statement, I said it is an album cover and for what album. I put the tag on it which states how it can be used. What more do you want?--E tac 03:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Well since you know that this is a genuine album cover, a simple google or yahoo search could show that to you if you a disagree. Perhaps you could add the proper statement for me and actually help this project instead of hurting it.--E tac 03:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Well could you show me an example of a properley uploaded album cover, I immediatley looked up the Metallica discography in hopes of seeing how it should look and find that those albums have nothing but the tag at all. So could you show please show me an example of a properley uploaded album cover as mine and the ones for the heavy metal band that has sold more records than any other band on the face of the planet were uploaded inccorectley.--E tac 03:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I wasn't being resistant, I just was unable to easily find a properley listed album cover. I figured that would be easier then wading through a policy page.--E tac 03:28, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Please Stop vandalizing the Marc Daubert Page.

Please stop vandalizing the Marc Daubert Page. Your control-freakish ways are starting to harm Wikipedia and make everyone go to Citizendium. I have reported your abuse of power to an administrator. I had to take time out of my workday to scan every single picture on the Parlor Tricks CDD, which you will find int he album page. I cannot believe that you actually think you can just delete Wikipedia pages just because you've never heard of something. It's people like you that are sending this website straight down the toilet. Judging from other messages on your page, it's clear that you are becoming a problem that needs to be dealt with. FroBro22 13:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Which WP:ADMIN? I see nothing in your contributions log. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 18:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

JAG (band)

Just wanted to personally let you know that I have sourced JAG (band), hopefully enough to alleviate your concerns. Dan, the CowMan 21:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Moment Ends Photography

I am sorry to report that these ARE my photographs, my friend. However, the Phish Phactory website login information now belongs to David Murphy, who now hosts this inactive site since Chris and I left in 2003. Therefore I cannot edit the page, which, as you might notice, is only readable during a Google image search. This disclaimer is no longer on the original site. However, on the site, I wrote the following disclaimer back in November 2000:

"Copyright Notice.

All photographs and contents of this site are copyright The Moment Ends Photography � 2000 All Rights Reserved.

All photographs and text appearing in the Moment Ends Photography site are the exclusive property of The Moment Ends Photography and are protected under United States and International copyright laws.

The Moment Ends Photography gives permission for these photographs to be downloaded and printed for personal use only.

The Moment Ends Photography encourages artists to use the images for non-commercial and non-profit projects, especially CD-R cover artwork.

Any other reproduction or manipulation of these images without the permission of The Moment Ends Photography is a violation of copyright. No images are within Public Domain.

These photos are not available for sale.

Thank You."

The key sentence here is "The Moment Ends Photography encourages artists to use the images for non-commercial and non-profit projects." Wikipedia falls under this category, therefore I feel these images are more than legitimate. FrankStevens2007 00:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Phish

Hi - I've deleted the older image for you. For now, with one edit from each, I'm not going to warn the users. However, if they continue to be disruptive, and it is clear that they are socks of SEGA, I would suggest a vists to WP:SSP or WP:ANI, where someone more familiar with SEGA will be able to comment. As it is, I will be indef blocking the second "Photosucks" account, and may choose to block the first on the grounds of inappropriate username. Thanks, Martinp23 21:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Help on an RFC

Hmm... it seems that the interpretation of some rules changes over time. As a clerk, I should avoid taking a particular opinion on any given check, but I think your best bet might be saying pretty much what you said at my talk page, at the case page. Or possibly at Uninvited's user talk (I haven't actually spoken with him, too much, so not sure where he'd prefer). Pointing out the previous checks might be good, too, not sure. Hope that helps. – Luna Santin (talk) 02:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

SEGA

Ban enacted; see User:SEGA. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 08:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - April 2007

The April 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by Grafikbot 11:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user talk page, it's much appreciated. =) -Panser Born- (talk) 21:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Widespread Panic page

Hi, This is Mattd523. I am part of the band's Widespread Panic management Brown Cat, Inc. The band had asked me to look into updating the band's wikipedia page, and I have started with the most recent picture of the band. Please allow me to edit the page with the photo Widespreadpanic.jpg and bear with me as I learn my way through Wikipedia and the proper way to go about these updates. I apologize for any bad form on my part. Thanks very much. --Mattd523 21:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Moeron/Archive_5&oldid=1190100924"