User talk:Kevin: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Kevin/Archive 7) (bot |
|||
(39 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{notaround|3=June 13, 2015}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
||
Line 38: | Line 39: | ||
Cheers! |
Cheers! |
||
== Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote == |
|||
== Consider another unblock? == |
|||
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at [[Special:SecurePoll/vote/360|this link]]. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2013/Coordination#Electoral_Commission|the election commissioners]]. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, [[User_talk:TParis|TParis]] |
|||
Hi Kevin. I watched the events unfold since you unblocked Cla68. I think that generally any admin should be able to unblock an oversight admin block to the extent he can tell what happened and ascertain policy-violating edits are unlikely to reoccur. Otherwise it's just an ego thing. "Do not diminish the size of my ego by daring to undo my block." And I think this is proved by the reblock as "don't unblock without ArbCom permission." In other words it's now demonstrably about hierarchy and not any supposed heinousness that's only viewable via oversight. Anyhow, since you've demonstrated guts by your handling of the response, and now I note unchastened because you're pushing even now for Cla68's block to be lifted, maybe you'll have a look at my case. |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:TParis@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TParis/SecurePoll/List --> |
|||
==[[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|Speedy deletion]] nomination of [[:Template:Afc b]]== |
|||
I was no-warn no-discussion blocked by Timotheus Canens for sockpuppetry last May. It's simply not true. I cleanstarted once because of harassment, never went back. I've always been straight-up about it, even from edit #1[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Colton_Cosmic&oldid=477070007]. My defenses were never replied to, and my appeals were declined for non-policy (don't talk back to an admin, failed to accept BWilkins' offer to accept the divulging of your previous account) as well as counter-policy (must give up your previous account to ArbCom) reasons. If you look over my situation, you'll perhaps think "oh there must be something he's not telling me here" why would ArbCom reject this, but really they never gave any responsive answer to me, no evidence, no nothing, just this laughable without explanation "carefully considered, declined to unblock." For the first appeal I was told though it would be denied because Timotheus Canens had not responded to its query. By the time of the second, he was an arb and chose not to recuse. Forgive me, it's cartoon-like. |
|||
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|48px|left|alt=|link=]] |
|||
A tag has been placed on [[:Template:Afc b]] requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#T3|section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion]] because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted. |
|||
Anyhow, should you undertake to help me out somehow, all I can say is I'll play it straight with you. Not knowing what else to do, I did resort to clearly-disclosed block evasion. In other words, IP edits that I sign my ID to. Other than the fact they're evades, I've conformed to policy, I think. There was one where I was mistaken about jargon, and my aggravation was apparent in another, but overall I've tried to live up to the project's spirit. Here's some examples [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AClean_start&action=historysubmit&diff=543047384&oldid=542482837][http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AArkRe&action=historysubmit&diff=543572660&oldid=543431855][http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AYoureallycan&action=historysubmit&diff=543228062&oldid=543050746]. You do have to entertain the proposition that block evasion can possibly be justifiable. Consider the article of a young actress said without attribution (and maybe with) to have contracted herpes. The blocked editor is still supposed to take it out. WP:BLP trumps WP:EVADE. Justifiable block evasion. I'm not that noble in my situation don't get me wrong, but I say that in the absence of any evidence or explanation to support my block (and this there has never been) it is justifiable block evasion. Thanks. This is Colton Cosmic. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/107.1.120.50|107.1.120.50]] ([[User talk:107.1.120.50|talk]]) 16:15, 21 March 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Well I've had a look. I see your latest block is by one of our esteemed Arbitrators, which rules out me taking any part. I was willing to give up my sysop bit for Cla68, but I won't for you. [[User:Kevin|Kevin]] ([[User talk:Kevin#top|talk]]) 21:15, 21 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:: I don't fault you for that. You looked, which is more than most bother to do. I think you read the block log incorrectly, what SilkTork did there was to stuff my talkpage under an "extended" label that must be clicked on to see the entirety. He didn't block me though. I was only blocked by "Timotheus Canens" who called me sockpuppet, and by UltraexactZZ who faulted me for not accepting Bwilkins'[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AYoureallycan&action=historysubmit&diff=543227965&oldid=543050746] supposed privacy-preserving offer to examine my previous account in exchange for his forbearance not to immediately cut me off from my talkpage. I was confused myself though, so I asked an arb whether ArbCom's declining of my block appeal transformed it into an "ArbCom block," to which he said "no, we have no monopoly on appeals." By "esteemed" I can't tell if you're being ironic, but I can say that SilkTork informed me in the sixth or so day of my appeal that it would be declined if Timotheus failed to respond to ArbCom's query about it. Which makes makes me tend to unesteem SilkTork. But, Kevin, by my thinking, one in a position of authority can't just go by those he esteems, he has has to examine the facts and the rules, and there I can again assure you that those don't support my block, and that anyone who says I've socked or been dishonest in any way... well the strongest I can respond to that out-person is it's just not so. This is Colton Cosmic. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/65.96.6.135|65.96.6.135]] ([[User talk:65.96.6.135|talk]]) 20:37, 23 March 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes. |
|||
== Give him ALL the barnstars == |
|||
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by [[:Template:Afc b|visiting the page]] and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with [[Wikipedia:List of policies|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]]. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Template%3AAfc+b|deleting administrator}}, or if you have already done so, you can place a request [[WP:RFUD|here]]. <!-- Template:Db-t3-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> '''''[[User:NYKevin|<span style="color: red;">N</span>]][[User talk:NYKevin|<span style="color:green;">Y</span>]][[Special:Contributions/NYKevin|<span style="color:blue">Kevin</span>]]''''' 18:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC) |
|||
For taking the correct action in a situation where others either didn't have the nerve to, didn't feel the need to, or didn't want to. [[User:Ryan Vesey|'''''Ryan''''']] [[User talk:Ryan Vesey|'''''Vesey''''']] 03:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
==File permission problem with File:Bobestelle.gif== |
|||
:Yes. Bravo. — [[User:Hex|<span style="color:#000">'''Hex'''</span>]] [[User_talk:Hex|<span title="Hex's talk page"><span style="color:#000">(❝</span>'''<span style="color:#900">?!</span>'''<span style="color:#000">❞)</span></span>]] 10:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:Copyright-problem.svg|64px|left|alt=|link=]] |
|||
:Obviously, this was the correct decision. It is a shame that on Wikipedia, what is obviously correct to any normal human being is a hotly debated topic and a motion to ban the person who pointed out the situation gets about 50/50 support. --[[User:B|B]] ([[User talk:B|talk]]) 12:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks for uploading '''[[:File:Bobestelle.gif]]'''. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license. |
|||
::A few centuries ago, it would have been "obviously correct" to ban someone for being an atheist. So, the only way to really tell if something is correct is to have a rational debate about it. [[User:Count Iblis|Count Iblis]] ([[User talk:Count Iblis|talk]]) 18:17, 3 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes. Because clearly there's no difference between being an atheist and hosting a child pornography website. Being an atheist impacts only your own soul (or, I suppose, the atheist would argue, nothing whatsoever), whereas child pornography necessarily requires the exploitation and abuse of children. If your argument is that cultural mores are evolving and therefore should not exist, even to the point of accepting child abuse, then I strongly disagree with your assertion. It would be nice if Wikipedia didn't feel the need to go out of its way to demonstrate a reprobate moral conscience. --[[User:B|B]] ([[User talk:B|talk]]) 18:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::And a rational debate a few centuries ago would likely see the atheist banned. So I'm not sure what your point is. We are all living today, by the laws and social conventions of today. Where pedophilia is universally reviled. And before you leap in with a semantic argument, by pedophile I mean anyone who sexually molests children, traffics or watches kiddy porn, talks about their desire for pubescent kids, or invites minors into their house and gives them porn. None of them have a place here. [[User:Kevin|Kevin]] ([[User talk:Kevin#top|talk]]) 21:53, 3 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::::The mere act of having a rational debate would itself have been seen as heresy. It was precisely a more rational attitude that led to the [[Age of Enlightenment]]. Thing is, we keep nasty things like child porn out of here by focussing on building the encyclopedia using the policies we have. With that focus, we can leave it to law enforcement to act against pedophiles if that's necessary. We don't have to ban people simply because they may be criminals, we should leave that to the police, prosecutor, judge and jury. [[User:Count Iblis|Count Iblis]] ([[User talk:Count Iblis|talk]]) 22:34, 3 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Your argument to let pedophiles freely interact with children here might be more effective if you made it at the policy page. [[User:Kevin|Kevin]] ([[User talk:Kevin#top|talk]]) 23:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{tq|"we keep nasty things like child porn out of here by focussing on building the encyclopedia using the policies we have"}} You mean like the policy that says [[Wikipedia:Child protection|editors who identify themselves as pedophiles will be blocked indefinitely.]] — [[User:Hex|<span style="color:#000">'''Hex'''</span>]] [[User_talk:Hex|<span title="Hex's talk page"><span style="color:#000">(❝</span>'''<span style="color:#900">?!</span>'''<span style="color:#000">❞)</span></span>]] 10:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I started an RFC about this policy, the issue being that someone can have identified themselves only off-Wiki as a pedophile, which in practice is still grounds for being blocked here. I did not weigh in with my opinion yet there. There are a number of reasons why I think this is a bad idea. If we first focus purely on protecting children here, then one needs to scrutinize innapropriate behavior right here, someone having declared themselves as being sexually attracted to children does not by itself make that person a threat (I know that this is a huge taboo like subject, but research does point to about 1% or so of the population having such sexual feelings to some degree, obviously they are not all dangerous pedophiles. The Devils's Advocate also made that point on AN/I or on Jimbo's talk page). Obviously, it doesn't make much sense for someone with criminal intentions to mark themselves in a way that would lead to greater scrutiny. Another thing is that when it comes to grooming children, there are people involved with this who are not themselves pedophiles, they make and sell child porn pictures for money alone. So, my point is then that we're going about dealing with this problem in the wrong way. |
|||
::::::Then when it comes to Wikipedia itself, when we allow arguments like "editors X' opnion on matter Y outed on website Z is not consistent with our social norms", then sooner or later the domain of Y and Z tend to increase in size. So, while today Y is mainly about pedophiles, tomorrow it will also include alleged terrorists, or people seen to be sympathetic to certain groups that many disapprove of, and then some time later you'll end up banning the advocates these people who themselves don't believe in their causes. Also, we can't then argue that other Wikipedia's can't do the same w.r.t. issues they feel strongly about but with which we strongly disagree about. [[User:Count Iblis|Count Iblis]] ([[User talk:Count Iblis|talk]]) 12:36, 5 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::The person in question did say on Wikipedia that he ran a child pornography FTP server in the 1990s. It's not really outing to say that. --[[User:B|B]] ([[User talk:B|talk]]) 22:54, 5 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either |
|||
== POINTy behaviour == |
|||
* make a note permitting reuse under the [[WP:CC-BY-SA|CC-BY-SA]] or another acceptable free license (see [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Free licenses|this list]]) '''at the site of the original publication'''; or |
|||
* Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to '''permissions-en@wikimedia.org''', stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter [[WP:CONSENT|here]]. If you take this step, add {{tl|OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion. |
|||
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to '''permissions-en@wikimedia.org'''. |
|||
[[Template:Did you know nominations/List of Wikipedia controversies|This]] is getting very close to the line of [[WP:POINT|disrupting Wikipedia to make a point]]. Please don't do that, especially given that you're an admin. [[User:Prioryman|Prioryman]] ([[User talk:Prioryman|talk]]) 23:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:THIS is "Pointy"? Now, if someone tried to run a gazillion "Wikipedia controversy" DYKs on the front page over a prolonged period of time, which may or may not be related to private commercial interests to the extent that THAT would be pointy. You've got it flipped.<span style="color:Blue">[[User:Volunteer Marek|Volunteer ]]</span><span style="color:Orange">[[User talk:Volunteer Marek|Marek]]</span> 23:14, 16 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes, it's pointy. Trying to run a DYK that is blatantly noncompliant with [[WP:BLP]], as you yourself have pointed out, is very bad form. [[User:Prioryman|Prioryman]] ([[User talk:Prioryman|talk]]) 23:25, 16 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::Is there some part of it that is untrue? [[User:Kevin|Kevin]] ([[User talk:Kevin#top|talk]]) 00:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::::The subject of the DYK hook is not a public figure and does not use that name on the English Wikipedia. If even Volunteer Marek can see the problems with it, you should be able to as well, and frankly I would expect you to given that you hold a sysop bit. [[User:Prioryman|Prioryman]] ([[User talk:Prioryman|talk]]) 00:17, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::::''If even Volunteer Marek can see the problems with it'' - Prioryman, cut out the personal attacks. I'm pretty sure I have a much better grasp of WP:BLP than you.<span style="color:Blue">[[User:Volunteer Marek|Volunteer ]]</span><span style="color:Orange">[[User talk:Volunteer Marek|Marek]]</span> 00:33, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::The article is in compliance with WP:BLP, which you are probably well aware of. It was the original proposed hook which ran afoul of WP:BLP. I fixed that. You could have, but didn't.<span style="color:Blue">[[User:Volunteer Marek|Volunteer ]]</span><span style="color:Orange">[[User talk:Volunteer Marek|Marek]]</span> 00:08, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:Who is this Prioryman and why is he so frenetically whinging? <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz|<font style="color:blue;background:yellow;">'''Kiefer'''</font>]][[User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#top|<font style="color:blue;">.Wolfowitz</font>]]</span></small> 09:33, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::https://www.google.com/search?q=Prioryman may explain a little. — [[User:Hex|<span style="color:#000">'''Hex'''</span>]] [[User_talk:Hex|<span title="Hex's talk page"><span style="color:#000">(❝</span>'''<span style="color:#900">?!</span>'''<span style="color:#000">❞)</span></span>]] 12:19, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::My [[User:Prioryman|user page]] says everything you need to know, and is certainly a lot more useful than the maunderings of off-wiki nutters. [[User:Prioryman|Prioryman]] ([[User talk:Prioryman|talk]]) 19:22, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::::I don't know. There's some interesting stuff there on Google. I do think that if one obsesses over off-wiki nutters then some of the nuttery does tend to rub off. [[User:Kevin|Kevin]] ([[User talk:Kevin#top|talk]]) 22:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Yes, quite. <looks meaningfully at Kevin's off-wiki forum membership> [[User:Prioryman|Prioryman]] ([[User talk:Prioryman|talk]]) 22:21, 17 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
If you believe the media meets the criteria at [[Wikipedia:Non-free content]], use a tag such as {{tl|non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use]], and add a [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|rationale]] justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags]] for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. |
|||
== resurrecting an article == |
|||
Hi Kevin. |
|||
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user=Kevin}} your upload log]. '''Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''', as described in [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#F11|section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion]]. You may wish to read Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:image use policy|image use policy]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no permission-notice --> <span style="color:#fff;background:Blue"> ★ </span> [[User:BigrTex|<span style="color: blue;">Bigr</span>]] [[User Talk:BigrTex|<span style="color: red;">Tex</span>]] 02:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC) |
|||
I've recently learned a bit about the field of Core Energetics, and I'm excited to finally find a topic where I have some knowledge to give back to Wikipedia after all these years. So I'd like to resurrect and clean up this page:<br /> |
|||
http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Meco/sandbox<br /> |
|||
I've read the history of the page, but I'm unclear why you removed it.<br /> |
|||
What needs to be cleaned up, and what's the process for this?<br /> |
|||
Regards,<br /> |
|||
[[User:Harvest316|Harvest316]] ([[User talk:Harvest316|talk]]) 06:09, 15 July 2013 (UTC) |
|||
I've never seen this article before, [[User:Jimfbleak]] moved it, you might ask him what the reason was. [[User:Kevin|Kevin]] ([[User talk:Kevin#top|talk]]) 22:19, 15 July 2013 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 02:36, 22 April 2021
This user may have left Wikipedia. Kevin has not edited Wikipedia since June 13, 2015. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
If I posted on your talk page, I have it watched so you can reply there. It just makes for easier reading. Thanks.
|
|||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Are you certain?
[edit]http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Permissions#Kevin.40enwiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avraham (talk • contribs)
John Avlon marketing his book.
[edit]Hi,
So I noticed a sentence in the "radical center" wiki with no citation.
The definitive history of "Centrism" in America, and probably the best-selling radical centrist book to date[citation needed], is John Avlon's Independent Nation (2004, pbk. 2005).
I was unaware that sales figures were kept for "radical centrist" publications, so I did some searching for a top 10 list of radical centrists books by various years (2009, 2008, 2007 etc..). Unfortunately, I was unable to find such a list.
So, I removed the sentence. Then I went to John Avlon's wiki to remove the following sentence, which cites as its source the sentence in the "radical center" wiki that has no citation!
Independent Nation has been called, "the definitive history of 'Centrism' in America, and probably the best-selling radical centrist book to date."
Unfortunately, I'm a newbie so I can't change the page. I imagine there were some "angry" edits made in the past few months which is why the page is protected. Nevertheless, the above sentence strikes me as pure unsupported marketing which shouldn't have a place on a factual bio page.
Cheers!
Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote
[edit]Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis
Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Afc b
[edit]A tag has been placed on Template:Afc b requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. NYKevin 18:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Bobestelle.gif
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Bobestelle.gif. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ★ Bigr Tex 02:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)