User talk:Anna Frodesiak/archive52

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60

New one

Here's one for dishes that use various or several types of meat. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:04, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

It's a great one! A bit of a list, a bit of a list of lists, and it may even become a bit of an outline. Well done, my friend. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:16, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

RfA

File:New Zealand TW-17.svg

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:26, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much, AF. I really appreciate your support, and hope that we can meet in real life some day, so that I can collect on that Daquiri offer. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it`

You are most welcome, my friend. And yes, to sit down with you and enjoy a fine daiquiri would be fantastic. I do hope we can do that. Happy mopping (or "mappy hopping" if you've had one too many daiquiris)! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:16, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

My favorite mistake of that type is a "cough of cuppy". :-) StuRat (talk) 00:40, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Mmmmmm, sounds good....best served with a "crash of deam". :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:44, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

LPU

The lpu socks are back and stronger than ever! Even after other editors reverted their work, they seem to be unfazed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/792378938 King Kunta (talk) 05:40, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi King Kunta. I see no behavioural evidence to tie Simons47 to any of the other blocked editors working on that article. He could be a meatpuppet, though. I see one of his edits to LPU being unsourced, promotional, and unencyclopedic, but that is all. Anyhow, feel free to warn him for any inappropriate edits.

Considering the amount of certain sock/promo edits in the past month, I may soon protect the article. It is a last resort. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:13, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

i have just added the affilation and approval of orghanization why you have not added 07:42, 27 July 2017 User talk:Simons47

Hi User:Simons47. Is editing here part of your job? Are you being compensated in any way for improving articles here? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Trust for Nature logo - 01.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Trust for Nature logo - 01.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:52, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

For the record. Deleted by me because company's new logo now in use. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:43, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

The sauce is the boss

Any Chinese garlic sauces missing from the new article? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:56, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Another fine one, my friend! The difference between then and now in terms of Wikipedia's food coverage is astonishing. So, garlic sauces here? I guess there are jarred ones where the main ingredient is garlic. I will check. Pretty much all sauces have garlic in them in China. Always the same: ginger, garlic, soy sauce. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:33, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I was surprised that an article didn't exist for this before. No way, not all sauces in China have garlic! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

...such as soy sauce, right?! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:42, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Soy sauce is loaded with garlic and ginger. It doesn't even contain soy. That's a myth.

And "No way, not all sauces in China have garlic!"?? They do! All sauces must have ginger, garlic, soy sauce. It's the law! See at Chinese cuisine where it says, and I quote: "All sauces must have ginger, garlic, soy sauce. It's the law!" That's a direct quote! Seriously, I was just at that article to find 'garbage sticks', a breakfast dish because I can't remember the Chinese name. Guess what? Only one occurrence of the word "breakfast". Odd. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:45, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Before I respond to the above, check out the new List of Chinese sauces I just created. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Okay, that's eerily fast. :) The lead needs fixing. It should read "...This is a list of notable Chinese sauces. Many types of sauces are used in Chinese cuisine and all must have ginger, garlic, soy sauce. It's the law!..." Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Instead of garbage sticks, I want Crab in oyster sauce. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:53, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I changed the lead to "... encompassing sauces that originated in China or are widely used in Chinese cuisine"... North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:57, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Check out Red cooking; I don't recall ever seeing this article before. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:00, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

So weird. I just ate Crab in oyster sauce two nights ago at this new seafood market here (old sat. photo while under construction). I will probably write an article about it. That long strip is a market selling hundreds of kinds of live seafood. Surrounding are dozens of restaurants. A worker from the restaurant you pick accompanies you to buy the stuff. They cook it and serve it to you at their restaurant. You pay the market and a fee to the restaurant. They even have Maine lobster. A little pricey at 40 USD a pound, but a nice treat. Haikou is coming along. Check the birth of the 95-storey Haikou Tower. I just uploaded that pic. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:05, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I remember Red cooking from a Rick Stein episode. I think there is often tons of horrible whole Sichuan pepper. Bite into one and your whole mouth goes numb an all you can taste is Sichuan pepper for the rest of the meal and onward. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:07, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Re: "that's eerily fast" I just wanted to create the article before you did... ha. Actually, the notion just became apparent per discussion here on your talk page. Re: Crab in oyster sauce, maybe I'm psychic? Nah. Just coincidence. When places cook lobster, I wish they would put the lobster out of its misery before cooking it, rather than boiling or steaming it while it is still alive. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:11, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Some peppers are just too hot; I don't understand how people can even eat some of them...bleh! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:12, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I agree. They should clonk them over the head first.

Sichuan pepper isn't hot at all. Just numbing.

For hot, we have Hainan yellow lantern chili. Like scotch bonnet. (My photos.) :)

Garbage sticks

Ah, Youtiao, literally "oil stick", known to me as "garbage stick". :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:15, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

That makes sense. Nothing about garbage sticks as food in searches... North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:26, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Very unhealthy stuff. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:29, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Probably good for a hangover, which I have a bit of today, after going out last night... Hey, see the new Hangover food article just created... North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Sure enough, Youtiao is a hangover food (source). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:39, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Nice! :) And where is the article on Cola Chicken? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Cola Chicken is notable, per book searches... North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Totally notable. I'm not starting food articles. You ought to start it. Also, there is a photo at commons. If you don't like that one, make the dish and take a pic. It's quite tasty. The vast amount of salt and sugar cancel each other out. So it is delicious while being deadly. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:15, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

 Works for me – Cola chicken created. It's a start. So, I have to ask, because I'm nosy, what's up with "I'm not starting food articles". Burnout? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:52, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

No more food articles, but Restraint chairs?! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:30, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

You're not being nosy by asking. That's okay. Well, I just don't create a lot of articles these days, so food ones get bumped down. I started Restraint chair because I saw it in the news and felt it really needed creating. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:40, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi North America. What do you think of that Pizza Corner mention in the China pizza article? Former? Merged with that other brand? It conflicts with the main article and the main article lead conflicts with the main article sections. I'm lost. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:43, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're getting at. The pizza in China (PIC) article is based upon what reliable sources state, and the Pizza Corner article also states that it was acquired by Papa John's Pizza. I added the words "by the Indian subsidiary of" to the PIC article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

We have "...Pizza Corner is a former pizzeria franchise chain that had a presence in China..." at Pizza in China "...Pizza Corner was an international franchise of pizzeria chains that offers a wide range..." "offers" present tense at Pizza Corner. Also at Pizza Corner further down is "...Pizza Corners in Bangladesh serve a...Pizza Corner's operations in China are concentrated on the tourist-friendly Hainan Island..."

So, does it exist in China or elsewhere? When it was absorbed into the Indian subsidiary of Papa John's Pizza and existing restaurants were converted to Papa John's Pizza outlets, does that mean Papa John sells pizza corner pizza or is it now the same pizza sold as Papa John's pizza? I'm confused. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:44, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

pizza!

I don't know. A lot of the sources I am finding are dated. The Hindu article from 2014 states that Papa John’s acquired it, but I'm not finding up-to-date sources about whether or not the stores were actually converted, signage changed, etc. The Hindu source does state, "As part of the acquisition, Papa John’s will convert the existing Pizza Corner stores to Papa John’s branded restaurants through first quarter of 2015.", so perhaps this has already occurred. Again, not finding much else to further verify if this all occurred or not. Per all of this, I added an {{update}} template to the Pizza Corner article moments ago. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the message you just left on my talk page, I would prefer to discuss this via email only. Please email me if you want, and then place the {{You've got mail}} template on my talk page (I don't check email regularly, so the template helps out a lot). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:39, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Pizza: Hmmmmmm, we may never know. :) Thanks for digging, though.

Other: Okay. :)

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:44, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Image - My Own Work

Hey Anna I hope you are well. I am reaching out to you today because I uploaded this image of me playing basketball https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sanjev_Rajaram_Assist.gif that my friend filmed for me using my phone. A wikimedia user raised the question of copyright but as far as all laws go this is my own work since technically I commisioned my friend Keith (work for hire) to film it for me so therefore it is mine. This issue I addressed here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Poyekhali/Archive4#Copyright yet they have not responded and my friend even sent them an email. I am getting irritated by this because there was no need for an OTRS ticket. Poyekhali has an Wikipedia account so he can join the discussion and address this :@Poyekhali: --Have a great day , Sanjev Rajaram (talk) 15:33, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sanjev Rajaram. I see the OTRS template now, so I guess this is all settled. Please let me know if there is still a problem. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

The issue is that it doesn't need an OTRS ticket as it is completely my own work I want to get that ticket removed because it was made on a false premise. I own the rights to the image they got it mistaken. I want the OTRS ticket removed and it just to say that it's my own work that I released so I get credit fully for my own work. --Have a great day , Sanjev Rajaram (talk) 23:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

The photo is not your own work because you didn't recorded the video. It is your friend's work, not yours. You just allegedly (because the OTRS ticket is not yet verified) hold the copyright since it is a work of hire, or the copyright is transferred to you. And in cases like this, an OTRS ticket is required to confirm that your friend really agreed to transfer the copyright of the video to you. If no response has been received, then I believe that's due to the understaffing of the OTRS, that's why I apologize for that inconvenience. I really hope there would be an alternative and faster solution than the OTRS, if there would be... Poyekhali (talk) 10:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Ah; so you want the OTRS template removed? You wouldn't do that. By removing the OTRS template and claiming that the gif is your own work, you would contradict yourself, which would confuse our re-users. If Commons would be following your logic, we will be overrun by license launderers who would just claim that the photo is a "work for hire", "the copyright is transferred to theirs", "I have the permission to license this image", blah blah blah. I will fix the description of the gif. Poyekhali (talk) 10:37, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm just off to bed, but will read this thoroughly tomorrow. For now, let's assume good faith. I have personally received images from people, friends, family, etc., and have taken ownership of them because they have said "Here, I took this for you because you asked me to." I uploaded them as my own property or work because I was the owner at that time of uploading. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:54, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If I may comment, as I have some knowledge in this area vis-a-vis:Wikipedia. As soon as a photo is snapped, the photographer owns the copyright and retains it unless they transfer ownership. As we learned from the Monkey selfie, it doesn't matter if the photographer owns the equipment they used to take the pic, the copyright goes to the photog. Oddly, transferring ownership is more in-depth than establishing the initial copyright. If it is a work for hire stipulating transfer of copyright, then when they deliver on their contract, the copyright is then transferred. A verbal "take my picture" is rather hard to confirm as a work-for-hire-with-transfer. Crow^Caw 23:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

@Poyekhali: :@Crow:Hard to confirm for you but not for me. So take your pick what do you want? Keith to go on video to transfer ownership to me? or would you like a paper contract? or Do you want the email exchange? Or do want me and him to send you a voicemail? How would you like it? Or maybe you want me to take a selfie with him giving me my phone and hashtag #itsallyoursnowSanjev I can get it done anyway you want so tell me. He emailed the OTRS ticket and the volunteers don't seem to respond very fast. How annoying I'm thinking of having someone delete it and just reupload another video of me making a shot. You two are really irritating me and making this way harder than this needs to be, if you keep denying me the proper credit for what is rightfully mine then I might stop donating to the Wikimedia Foundation and I'm quite a frequent donor (I have proof of that of you need it too) I'll tell Jimmy Wales this is the SOLE reason I cancelled my frequent donations, THE SOLE REASON. The only one who has been reasonable in all of this is Anna and I thank you for that --Have a great day , Sanjev Rajaram (talk) 02:58, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sanjev_Rajaram and others. The OTRS ticket says "...Wikimedia has received an e-mail confirming that the copyright holder has approved publication under the terms mentioned on this page..." so that means that image is fine.

Sanjev, next time, to prevent this, just say to your friend "...Is this now my property? Sure? A gift to me? Double sure? Good! Thanks for pressing the button. Shall I put you as author? Okay. Settled. Let's go play basketball..." and that procedure will prevent this from happening again.

Others who were worried about this basketball video, please, let's just use common sense and not go overboard over something that is almost certainly not in the category of Yousuf Karsh's best photo of Fidel Castro being uploaded by someone else as own work.

Remember what OTRS basically says: "...I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of this media work..." In this case, is Sanjev the creator? No. Is he the sole owner? Yes. He asked his friend to make it for him, so he is now the owner and I think his friend understands that. Let's assume Sanjev is not lying. Making him get his friend to email OTRS in these circumstances is a bit much. I understand why Sanjev is upset.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Long response

Hi Crow, Poyekhali, and Sanjev Rajaram. I think this is all about using common sense in each case.

For the record:

If a person, per request, emails me a photo for their article, I will upload it on their behalf with their name as the author. I will ask that they send in an OTRS. Please feel free to dig through my uploads to be sure I have done that.

Now, this is about basic common sense and likelihood of violating someone's rights.

A: Someone has been at Wikipedia for a decade, 200,000 edits, admin, huge Featured Article creator. A family member or personal friend snaps a photo gifts it to them. They say "I do not want credit. Do not put my name on it. Put your name on it. This is now your property. No signed papers. You now own it. That's that." They upload it with their name as author instead of the button-pusher. Fine by me. If someone wants to make a fuss and say they should put "unknown" or something as author, okay. But what's the chance that they are lying and if the cameraperson knew, they would be livid? Teensy.

B: Someone arrives and first thing is an upload of a professional photo of Gary Larson with source "User:I just registered two seconds ago", author "own work"? What's the chance that they are not the author and owner and if the cameraperson knew, they would be livid? Huge.

Case by case. Common sense. Please say if I'm getting this wrong so I can adjust my beliefs.

So, about the original poster: It sounds to me like he said to his friend "Film me playing basketball." Maybe he didn't say "This video becomes my property, right?" Maybe he should have. The chance that his friend will be livid feel his uploader friend broke the law and such? Pretty darn small. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:08, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Anna Frodesiak. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Wealth template

Frankly I'm surprised to get an immediate response. I was expecting to take a Wikibreak and come back to an empty thread. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 18:32, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi S. Rich. I know what you mean. Template talk page posts aren't watched that well. It is on my list because I started it way back when. Thanks for your interest in improving the name.

Stalkers are encouraged to head over to Template talk:Extreme wealth and give their views.

Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:58, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Ah, I remember you now. You brought up this issue a couple of years ago. I remember you saying something about capitalism being a great thing that doesn't end in tears. You don't still believe that do you? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:03, 2 August 2017 (UTC)