User talk:Rettetast

Archive1 Archive2

Press here to leave me a message
Sign your messags by typing ~~~~
I usually respond here

Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 18	30 April 2007	About the Signpost

Students in Western Civilization course find editing Wikipedia frustrating, rewarding	Statistics indicate breadth of Wikipedia's appeal
Featured lists reaches a milestone	Backlogs continue to grow
WikiWorld comic: "Calvin and Hobbes"	News and notes: Board resolutions, user studies, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Admin

Hi Rettetast,

I would like to nominate you for adminship. Is it ok for you?

Snowolf ^(talk) _CON ^COI - 19:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would accept a nomination. Rettetast 22:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm writing the nomination. Any strength point that you have? FAs? Snowolf ^(talk) _CON ^COI - 22:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

No FAs. just general clean up and vandalism fighting. Rettetast 22:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Done:

Snowolf would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Snowolf to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rettetast. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so. Snowolf ^(talk) _CON ^COI - 22:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 19	7 May 2007	About the Signpost

Four administrator accounts desysopped after hijacking, vandalism	Digg revolt over DVD key spills over to Wikipedia
Debate over non-free images heats up	Update on Wikimania 2007
Norwegian Wikipedian awarded scholarship	WikiWorld comic: "Friday the 13th"
News and notes: Election volunteers, admin contest, milestones	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Adminship

Congratulations, you are now an administrator - with pretty much unanimous support! If you haven't already, now is the time look through the Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Warofdreams talk 01:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

HELLO!!!!

JUST BECAUSE I CREATE AN ARTICLE ABOUT MYSELF DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU CAN DELETE IT!!!!! I THINK THAT YOU ARE SO STUPID THAT YOU CAN'T EVEN SPEAK ENGLISH!!!!

MHAJARNIS

Which article are you referring to? Rettetast 21:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I found out. It was Mohit. You have to agree that the article wasn't very encyclopedic? And please don't write in caps. Rettetast 21:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Your vote on my RFA is placed in "Oppose" section. However, your edit summary shows "Support". I was just puzzled. Can you clarify it? Thanks a lot! Aquarius • talk 21:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. Off course I meant too support. Rettetast 21:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion summaries

Hi - thanks for the feedback. What should the edit summary for nonsense articles like this be set to? Appreciate your help, --Oscarthecat 11:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, will be sure to use that approach now. --Oscarthecat 11:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Random Chocolate Chip Smiley Award

In the interest of promoting sweetness and light, you are hereby granted the coveted: Random Chocolate Chip Smiley Award Originated by: Pedia-I (Explanation and Disclaimer)

mmm yummy. Rettetast 14:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RFA, which passed with 53-1-0. I will put myself into the various tasks of a administrator immediately, and if I make any mistakes, feel free to shout at me or smack me in my head. Aquarius • talk 17:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I got it at the second attempt didn't I:-) Rettetast 17:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hi Rettetast, thanks for your support in my RfA, which passed unopposed. Please let me know if I can be of any assistance. --Seattle Skier (talk) 20:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 20	14 May 2007	About the Signpost

Administrator status restored to five accounts after emergency desysopping	User committed identities provide protection against account hijacking
Academic journals multiply their analyses of Wikipedia	WikiWorld comic: "Ubbi dubbi"
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Request deletion

Thanks you for deleting some of my old user subpages. Previously I was User:Joshua Chiew; I change my name to User:Joshua and I would like to delete my old monobook.js (which is now a redirect to my current monobook.js). Since I cannot edit the monobook.js file, I left a note on the talk page but you only deleted the talk page. Could you help me to delete User:Joshua Chiew/monobook.js? Thanks. --Joshua ^{Say "hi" to me!}_{What have I done?} 10:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Rettetast 12:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of EditPad

An article that you have been involved in editing, EditPad, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EditPad. Thank you. Vacuum Cleaner 01 21:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Latin American subaltern studies

Hi. I note that you deleted Latin American subaltern studies even though I'd put a "hangon" tag on it, immediately following a speedy delete. You did this with no apparent investigation. I'd put the tag there while I created and edited a replacement article. I feel the way you went about things was over-hasty and hardly impressive. You might have looked into why someone might put a tag asking people to, precisely, "hang on." --Jbmurray 19:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The only content of the article when I deleted it was {{hangon}}. It had already bin deleted when you recreated it with only the hangon template. And for the record. If an article meets the criteria for speedy deletion the article can be deleted at once even if there is a hangon template on it. Rettetast 19:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:Jbmurray. Thanks for responding. --Jbmurray 20:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Carioca RFA

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (31/4/1), so I am now an administrator. If you have any comments or concerns on my actions as an administrator, please let me know. Thank you! --Carioca 20:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Beerwolf

I was about to Db the above. In taking a look around, it appears that you did just that and it was replaced. This is a heads up if you are interested. --Stormbay 21:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 21	21 May 2007	About the Signpost

Corporate editing lands in Dutch media	Spoiler warnings may be tweaked
WikiWorld comic: "Disruptive technology"	News and notes: LGBT project mention, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Apt-x

You have just delete a page i have just creat. Can you tell me why? rht — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salsabelfast (talk • contribs)

It was blatant advertising for the product. Such pages are deleted on sight. Try to write a balanced article. Rettetast 10:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I was working on the page when you deleted it. Also you didn’t reply to my comments on the talk page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salsabelfast (talk • contribs)

I read them, but they did not change the fact that the article was blatant advertising. You can get tips for your first article at Wikipedia:Your first article. If you need the source for the deleted article, contact me. Rettetast 10:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

ok— Preceding unsigned comment added by Salsabelfast (talk • contribs)

Possible bad user pages?

Sorry to bug you, but you always have provided good help. When looking through some recent changes I stumbled onto these user pages, User:Fox and Falco rock, and User:Yoshi and Peach. They seem to be passing messeges through their user pages (which I warnged them for) but the way they cover it up is with a bunch of posts promoting a new game. What is a good way to go about dealing with this, or is it completely ok for them to post a bunch of crap on their user pages? Thanks. Inter16 15:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I have nominated them for deletion. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Yoshi and Peach and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Fox and Falco rock. Rettetast 15:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• I noticed what you were doing, it caught my eye when I looked through some recent changes. I looked at pages you went to have them deleted, and I see the process to use from now on. Thanks for the help......again.Inter16 15:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Rettetast 15:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Loyola University Museum of Art

Hello, Why have you reinstated the old entry for the Loyola University Museum of Art? I spent several hours yesterday updating the entry, correcting information and adding pictures to ensure it was up-to-date and informative. Thanks

Hello. Some of the information you added was not encyclopedic like information about prices and opening hours. Such information should not be included in wikipedia. The images you uploaded were deleted because they were under a license that did not allow commecial use. Such images are not allowed on wikipedia and are speedily deleted under the WP:CSD#I3-criteria. Your old version of the page are not lost. You can fin it in the articles history. You can find the ladt vesion you saved here. If you feel that I removed something that belongs in the article feel free to reinstate it. Rettetast 18:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Clubwear

I already reported him to AIV. He spammed at least 8 articles with his links (I took somewhat personal offense to the pansexual one, but that's me being an idiot). I say just block him. --Whsitchy 21:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Already done :-) --Rettetast 21:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Rettetast. I'd like to thank you for your support of my RfA. It was closed at surprising 75/0/0, so I'm an admin now. MaxSem 22:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

NovaNova

Can you tell me then if this is not vandalism what his editing are way in which is possible to solve that problem ?Rjecina 10:55, 26 May 2007 (CET)

Wikipedia:Resolving disputes --Rettetast 08:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Please restore Ghana Cedi images

Could you please restore:

• Image:5_cedis.jpg
• Image:10_cedis.jpg
• Image:20_cedis.jpg
• Image:50_cedis.jpg

They should have been tagged as {{Currency}}, but the original uploader chose the wrong license. --Eastmain 10:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Please provide a fair use rationale for each of the images. Rettetast 10:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

My Rfa

Hello, Rettetast. I just wanted to drop by to thank you for your kind support on my recent Rfa, it succeeded! I hope to live up to your expectations. Oh, and feel completely free to yell at me if I ever screw things up =) All the best, PeaceNT 12:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

I just came over an image marked by your bot and then checked and found Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MetsBot 11. I saw my request being archived from the bot request page earlier this night and thought all chance of getting my request fulfilled was gone. I just had to say thank you. This was great.

An idea for the bot. The images that has not bin confirmed to be in a category or article on commons may have bin added after the bot checked. Maybe the bot can check these images again after a period. And maybe it should list these images somewhere. Maybe at commons?

Again thank you for the great bot work. Rettetast 22:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :-). I'll try to incorporate the "recheck" into the bot soon, although no guarantees. As for listing the images that aren't in a category, it's possible, but I don't really think it's necessary. Since you're an image expert, I have a few questions for you :-) Do you know of an effective way to check if the license and source are appropriate on commons? Right now I'm checking for the exact wording and tags, or else the bot is asking me and I'm reviewing it manually. And if the image is in the public domain, does the uploader here on en.wiki need to be credited on Commons? If both the image here and on commons have the same license tag template does the source need to be listed on Commons? Is "this image is from the English Wikipedia" acceptable for a source? —METS501 (talk) 02:13, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I am no image expert...(yet). I am still learning. I would believe it is easiest to check the templates, but there is a third option. It could check what license category the image is in. I'll believe the tags would be easier to compare though but but there are probably templates with different names. I don't know how to deal with them.

As for the PD-problem there is probably no legal issues if the images containes that information, but if it was the en-uploader who released the image to PD, I would imagine the upload log should be there so that it is possible to check the license in the future. If its a random image from the us government that the en-uploader found on the net its not necessary with the en-upload log. Rettetast 07:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Image

Hi.

I know that you just deleted the image I uploaded of "Estadio Miguel Grau Piura.jpg". I don't know why it was deleted because the owner (of worldstadiums.com) gave me permission to use it.

MicroX 03:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Such licenses are not allowed on wikipedia. You can read more at Wikipedia:Image use policy. In short the the image has to be under a free license. Rettetast 07:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

But the copyright allowed the image to be commerical. Could it be uploaded again or is there another problem?

No, it didn't. You asked if you could use the image on wikipedia and got a yes. Nothing more nothing less. We want wikipedia to be a free encyclopedia where one can use what you find in other places. Such licenses as this image had could not be used elsewhere. You can ask if they want to release the images under a free license, but it is probably easier to take a picture of your own, or find a wikipedian who live nearby to take on. You can also request an image on Commons:Commons:Picture requests. Rettetast 21:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

But on the website, it says that it can be used commercially. "World Stadiums is a database-related commercial website about stadiums." [1] Or have I misinterpreted this?

Where do you find that. I only see this. All materials appearing on World Stadiums, unless otherwise noted, including but not limited to stadium information, graphical images, and interactive applications cannot be reused in any way without prior permission from the owner[2]. Rettetast 21:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

But I did get permission. And the website says that it is commercial. Doesn't that qualify?[3]MicroX 21:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you did get permission, but only for wikipedia, and it is policy to not allow such images. Rettetast 05:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 22	28 May 2007	About the Signpost

Controversy over biographies compounded when leading participant blocked	Norwegian Wikipedian, journalist dies at 59
WikiWorld comic: "Five-second rule"	News and notes: Wikipedian dies, Alexa rank, Jimbo/Colbert, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Why?

You nominated my image of the toy soldier logo for speedy deletion. Why? please contact me at chrisdduffill@aol.com

It's explained in the message on your talk page. Images that is permitted only on wikipedia is not allowed. The image has to be under a free license. Rettetast 18:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Appeal of Deletion of Waffle Fry Paradox and the associated Talk Page

I would like to request an appeal of the deletion both the Waffle Fry Paradox and the associated talk page. I don't understand why my article was deleted in the first place and especially why the talk page was deleted. If the talk page is not the place to discuss the reasons why the article was deleted where is the proper forum. Please direct all further discussion on this topic either to my talk page User_talk:Cleggett or to the article's talk page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleggett (talk • contribs)

block request

Could you please block this user and delete his userpage, that it won't be found by google? Thanks, Harald Krichel 14:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Funny guy. He is blocked and deleted. Rettetast 14:34, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. He is a problem in many languages since his range is blocked in de.wp. --Harald Krichel 14:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Please delete this page aswell. --Harald Krichel 10:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Err

Why did you delete Krystal Forscutt??

evil_gerbil@hotmail.com

Because the article did not assert the importance or significance of the subject that is needed for an article on WP. If you disagree you can request undeletion at WP:DRV. Rettetast 14:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 23	4 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Sockpuppeting administrator desysopped, banned	Admin restored after desysopping; dispute centers on suitability of certain biographies
Controversial RFA suspended, results pending	Dutch government provides freely licensed photos
WikiWorld comic: "John Hodgman"	News and notes: Another Wikipedian dies, brand survey, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Davidnachbar.jpg

Rettetast - this image was one supplied by the candidate for public use. What attribution should it have? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DemiFL (talk • contribs)

Promotional images like this is not allowed on wikipedia. Images have to be under a free license and it is the author that can release it under a free license. A release to "public use" is not a free license. The fairuse alternative is not an option either since an image of a living person is easy to replace. Rettetast 19:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:ShHamzawmadinah2005.jpg

Although I believed it already clear I have re-uploaded it stating it is my own work & under a free license & I sincerely hope I 'm not dealing with an anti-Muslim Xenephobe. Enthogenesis 22:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You have to specify which free license you are releasing it under. I recommend GFDL which is the same as your text contributions are released under. Just add {{GFDL-self}} to the image. And for the record I am not an anti-Muslim Xenephobe:-). I just delete images that doesnt conform with Wikipedias image policy's. Rettetast 22:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

DavidNachbar

I apologize - it is for FREE use, not public use.

bobmorrow.jpg

Hello,

You deleted bobmorrow.jpg which was being used on the article for the former mayor of hamilton. This was probably because I did not upload it correctly. I have since contacted the city and they have told me through the Mayor's office that I may use any picture of the former Mayors on wikipedia. How do I upload and tag these correctly? If you would like me to forward you the email from City Hall I can do that as well.

Thanks.

Howard Rabb

Since you now have uploaded the images to commons, you can forward the e-mail that releases the images into a free license to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Remember that it is not a free license if the mail only states that the images can be used at wikipedia. Rettetast 06:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Kellingley colliery entry

Rattetast Thank you for your input. I'm still puzzled as to how to get the photo of the winding engine properly tagged/authenticated/certified correctly to allow its inclusion. I will have more input to put forward at a later date and hope to be able to make it a worthwhile article. Again, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Platenail (talk • contribs)

We need information about the author of the picture, and which license the author has released the image under. You can find information on which images that are accepted in the message left on your talk page. Have a nice day. Rettetast 22:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Soundpedialogo.jpg

The co-founder / CVO Gregory Gumo has given permission for the icon of soundpedia to be posted on wikipedia, ad for it to be available freely for all to use. if you have any questions regarding this you can email him directly at greg@soundpedia.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayumijomori (talk • contribs)

I see that another editor has helped out. A permission to use an image for wikipedia ia by our policys not good enough. The image should be under a free license. Wikipedia also accepts some sorts of fair use, but I am not sure that this image is really needed in the article, but I will not interfer. Have a great day. Rettetast 22:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Question

why was the hmms picture deleted... I just want to know Slykillrs 13:35, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The image(Image:HMMS.jpg) had no source or license. All images has to be tagged with a license and a source must be provided. There are information on how to tag an image and which licenses that are allowed on the message on your talk page. Rettetast 13:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Images found on other sites - attempting a discussion

I've started a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems regarding some issues with image licensing - since you were one of the users whose copyvio marker started me thinking about it, I'd welcome your comment. --Alvestrand 15:44, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 24	11 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Privacy report lists Wikipedia among best sites, but needing improvement	Board candidacies open, elections planned
WikiWorld comic: "Why did Mike the Headless Chicken cross the road?"	News and notes: Ontario error, no consensus RFA, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:03, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Facts-anette.jpg and Image:Paul Potts at ITV.jpg

Hello Rettetast.

Ser du er fra Norge, så regner med at det er greit hvis jeg tar det på norsk. Begge de bildene du henviser til er det ikke jeg som har lastet opp. Begge bildene var uten gyldig lisens fra starten av, så det var det jeg som satt på. Jeg har ikke klart å finne noen bilder med en gratis lisens noe sted. Ser du skriver at det ikke er nok med å skrive at det ikke finnes noe gratis bilde, så lenge et gratis bilde kan bli lagd. Men så lenge det for øyeblikket ikke finnes noen gratis bilder, så synes jeg at det gjeldende bildet burde være der. Beklager hvis jeg ikke hadde en utdypende beskrivelse av fair-use på bildene, trodde jeg hadde fått med det viktigste. Men hvis jeg har forstått det riktig så må alle disse kravene oppfylles for at bildene skal være gyldig? Så vidt jeg kan se så oppfyller begge bildene kravet.

Ha en fin kveld! : ) Dybdal 21:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Kommunikasjon skal egentlig gå på engelsk, men la gå:-). Beklager at du fikk meldingen på Facts-anette.jpg. Det andre bildet så jeg at du hadde redigert og ville bare gi beskjed slik at du ble klar over retningslinjene. Det er nemlig slik at når det kan bli produsert ett fritt bilde så bryter bildene med WP:FUCs første kriterium. Det er ikke godt nok at det ikke for tiden finnes ett fritt bilde. Bildene bryter derfor med WP:FUC og kan derfor ikke brukes på engelsk wikipedia. (Explaining the first fair use criteria in Norwegian) Rettetast 22:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Skjønner. Kan godt fortsette på engelsk. : )

I get your point : ). What I understod is that this image is not valid on wikipedia and has to be deleted. That's fair enough. But just to make a point, there are probably thousands of copyrighted images on en.wikipedia that easly could have been replaced with a free one! ;) Håper jeg forstå alt riktig, er mange regler man må passe på! : ) Have a nice day! Dybdal 13:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

You are correct. If you see one, tag it with {{subst:orfud}}. Rettetast 14:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Will do! Dybdal 14:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use criteria on 133332.jpg

I contested the template put on 133332.jpg, see the talk page for further information. -Flubeca (t) 00:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Revelationfest.jpg

Hi, I was under the impression that I had 48 hours to claim that image was fair use. Why has it been deleted then ?

Images that are uploaded under a license that states that it can only be used on Wikipedia is speedily deleted, but we usualy wait at least one hour before we delete it. If you want me to restore the image so you can claim fair use. Please tell me. Rettetast 10:48, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Sorry about delay, Yes I would like for you to restore so I can. Thank you Destinsoul 06:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. Please provide the source of the work, all available copyright information, and a detailed fair use rationale. This can be inserted at the image description page. Rettetast 14:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:Billy Yesudian.jpg

Hi. Jus realised that you'd deleted this image. Was wondering why. I see the reasons given are because the Fair Use Rationale was incorrect. Please let me know how I can use an image that is found without a copyright notice on a website. There are no copyright notices accompanying any of the content on that particular webpage. Further, we need an image to illustrate the article regarding the musician. Any help in this regard would be welcome, if you have the time. Thanks. aJCfreak yAk 15:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use images are not allowed if a freely licensed image can be produced. Since this was an image of a living person there is no doubt it can be replaced. That you currently can't find a freely licensed does not change the fact tht such an image can be produced. Rettetast 17:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:9781741143874.jpg

I'm a bit confused as to why this was flagged as non-free content and why it is claimed there is no explanation or rationale. The Fair Use Rationale was provided at the time, explaining that this is free content (publicity photo) provided by the publisher specifically to illustrate revies, etc of the book and its author. Copyright remains with the publisher however free use is permitted for promotion, research and study. Dbromage 01:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I have replied on the image talk page. Rettetast 14:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 25	18 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikipedia critic's article merged	Board election series: Election information
Admin account apparently compromised, blocked	Controversial RfA withdrawn, bureaucrats fail to clarify consensus
WikiWorld comic: "They Might Be Giants"	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Image talk:A8_Coupe.JPG

For the sake of avoiding redundancy, I must refer you to the discussion page of this image. If you had read the discussion page before disputing the fair use claim, you would see that this matter has been settled before. User:Quadell disputed the fair use claim last year. I explained that the vehicle pictured is a one-off prototype that has not made a public appearance since 2002, and for that reason it should remain, citing fair use. Quadell agreed and withdrew the dispute. Jagvar 03:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. I have now marked the image with the template {{rk}} that says it has bin reviewed. Rettetast 14:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

File:Wayne Goss

I'm unhappy that this image was deleted without any attempt at discussion on its page. An uppity bot is one thing; common courtesy in actual discussion is quite another. Slac speak up! 04:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The image was tagged as replaceable for seven days. I understand that you didn't know this but it is impossible for me to contact all the uploaders that hasn't bin notified for all the images I delete. If you disagree that this image is replaceable I am open for discussion. Rettetast 14:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I accept that you were within policy. It's certainly not a policy I like, but that's my business. Slac speak up! 08:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Abbot Pass hut.jpg

Your input would be appreciated on Image talk:Abbot Pass hut.jpg.  ◉ ghoti 13:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I have replied. Rettetast 14:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for deleting some of my user pages. The importance of little things like that can get overlooked... GDallimore (Talk) 13:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Rettetast 14:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

CSD AutoReason

I was informed earlier today about a bug in IE6. I've since fixed it per the suggestion and IE6 is working fine again. Just thought I'd let my spamlist know that they need to purge their local cache (Ctrl+F5 on most browsers) to get the latest version of the script. Regards, ^demon^{[omg plz]} 16:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

ANSWER

Explain how fair use rationale for "Image:Richmarsland.JPG" was not valid. I will give you 100's of image examples that exist with poor/no fair use rationale but should not be on WP. --Mikecraig 06:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

It was an image illustrating a living person and therefore generally considered replaceable with a freely licensed image. The fact that he is not photographed often do in my opinion not justify fair use. If you find other images like this, please tag them with {{subst:rfu}}. Rettetast 06:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks --Mikecraig 06:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Harisu DoDo commercial.jpg

This image you tagged for deletion has a detailed fair use rationale, and as such you are required to state your reasons why the rationale is not valid on the talk page; if not, the tag can be removed. I uploaded the image for a specific use in the named article, and I believe its use satisfies the terms of the licence. I'd certainly appreciate your comments if you don't think this is the case. Regards. PC78 19:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I have replied on the talk page. Thanks for telling me this. I had not noticed this. Rettetast 19:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

help

I have absolutely no idea what to fo with my Image:McDonald's Happy Meal toys (Australian) .jpg, i am not sure which template it requires.

Pece Kocovski 03:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

You should explain on the image description page why the image meets the criteria for fair use. You can find the criteria at WP:FUC. Also see Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline for description on how to write a good rationale. Rettetast 12:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Jack_Deveraux.jpg

I'm struggling to understand why the Jack Deveraux image was deleted. You wrote: "Thanks for uploading Image:Jack_Deveraux.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information." The photo was used for publicity on NBC.com, why would that not be fair use? Also, considering it is a picture of the person in question, I can't fathom how it wouldn't be fairly necessary to the article. Can you explain this in a way that does not sound like a robot? Anything you can tell me, would be helpful but... note that the way it was worded before didn't make any comprehensible sense to me. --Harlequin212121 04:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The criteria for using fair use at wikipedia can be found at WP:FUC. An image that is replaceable with another image can not be used as fair use on Wikipedia according to the first criteria at WP:FUC. This image illustrates a living person. Such images are generally not accepted under the fair use criteria if there is not a really good reason why a freely licensed image can be created. Hope this clarifies thing for you. Rettetast 09:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't a picture available for free for everyone on NBC's website, be considered a freely licensed image? --Harlequin212121 20:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

No. A freely licensed image could be used by anyone for any purpose. You can't do that with promotional images you find on websites. Rettetast 20:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Then I'm not sure how you can possibly find any other image? He's a soap opera character, any image of his is going to have to be taken from a promotional image. If he appeared in any other picture other than an officially sanctioned NBC photo, he'd simply be the actor who plays him, not the character. --Harlequin212121 21:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

That changes thing. Off course it is not possible to replace an image of a fictional character. Just reupload the image and state that in the rationale. Rettetast 21:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

re User:Pancasila

I note you have blocked the above editor. I would suggest giving an appropriate note on the talkpage, especially as it appears that the last contribution was back in April. The editor may yet return to WP, unaware that he had been "reprimanded". I did comment at WP:AN regarding using a time expiry block on an editor who appears to be no longer contributing, but I of course support your decision. LessHeard vanU 10:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. This was done to quikly by me. The block was not in line with policy since there was no need to block and I will unblock. Rettetast 10:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, sorry if this sounds as if I am disagreeing with myself, and thus you as above, but once you had placed the block I am more than happy for it to stand since it will remain in the editors log. This will alert any future admin to past infractions. For similar reasons a note should be left at the editors talkpage. This all assumes that the editor will return at some date. If you have already unblocked then this question is moot. I support all your actions in this matter. Cheers. LessHeard vanU 12:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Jack Hargreaves image deletion

Can you explain why the image I uploaded on 'Jack Hargreaves' recently has been deleted?I own the copyright of all images of the individual where not otherwise claimed and was ready to allow its use in Wikipedia. Rgds Simon Baddeley 10:54, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The image had no licensing information other than that you held the copyright. Every image should have a license. I see that you have tagged som of your uploads as {{GFDL}}. Just upload it again with the license and remember to explain why you owh the copyright. Rettetast 11:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Jml1.jpg

I understand that (in my opinion) it's a borderline call on whether it's replacable or not, but I've personally never seen a fair use image of the band from this period; the only images I've seen are those types I mentioned in the image page; If it is decided to be deleted, I understand the reasons for the decision. TheHYPO 04:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 26	25 June 2007	About the Signpost

Board election series: An interview with the candidates	RfA receives attention, open proxies policy reviewed
WikiWorld comic: "Thagomizer"	News and notes: Logo error, Norwegian chapter, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:00, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

{{Promophoto}}

What's the point of saying "Publicity photos, distributed as part of press kits by celebrities, corporations, candidates for political office, and others, may be eligible for use on Wikipedia under the doctrine of fair use." Wikipedia:Publicity photos if people just turn around and delete these?! --Smkolins 20:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

may. For all the criteria for using a non free image on wikipedia, see WP:FUC. Rettetast 20:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

so which of the 10 points are missed with the pictures you posted to my talk page?

• Image:Flora_feathers.jpg
• Image:Flora_grey.jpg
• Image:Flora_grey.jpg

No. 1. They are replaceable. Pictures of people who are still alive are almost always replaceable because anybody could just take a camera to them and take a picture. Rettetast 20:22, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

And if they aren't to be found online? --Smkolins 14:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. They are still replaceable. Rettetast 16:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

my images

I wish Wikipedia allowed people to delete their own images. Everytime,I log in I find another image of mine* tagged. Please stop leave notices, just put the image out of its misery and get it over with. if you got a problem with my images, just delete no questions asked. Don't tag it, i don't care. Just delete it then and there.

• By "mine", I mean I uploaded, but obviously don't own it.

Adamv88 02:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey Rettetast, why are you tagging all of my uploaded images for removal?

Why have you tagged all of the images which I have recently uploaded to Wikipedia? I have been posting images (along with the required "fair use rationale") that are unfairly being deleted by you. I am especially upset that you have tagged Image:FarrellLion.gif for removal, as this image is a non-copyrighted illustration of a lion, which is the Monsignor Farrell High School mascot. If this is the way that overzealous/malicious editors like you operate here on Wikipedia, then I won't waste my time posting images or editing articles anymore. Citizen Dick 19:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I am sorry that you feel this way. I have not removed any rationales provided by you. I only tagged the images becuse they did not have any rationale. Further I will not delete the images I have tagged. I will leave that to another admin. Why don't you just provide a rationale for the images as requred by WP:FUC? Rettetast 19:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 27	2 July 2007	About the Signpost

IP unwittingly predicts murder of wrestler: "Awful coincidence"	Board election series: Elections open
German chapter relaunches website, arranges government support	WikiWorld comic: "Cashew"
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Re fair use rationale on pics I've uploaded

Hi there!

I re-uploaded the picture for Baccara album "Baccara" 1977 and provided it with a fair use rationale. Would that be OK? I just want to get it right in the future.

Thanks in advance

Dreamer.se 15:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)dreamer.se

Yes, that is great. PS: You don't need to reupload the image. You can just edit the image description page. Rettetast 15:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Excellent - thanks! I'll get to it straight away. Dreamer.se 15:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)dreamer.se

Hi again,

Can you have a quick look and see if it seems alright now?

Thanks in advance

Dreamer.se 19:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)dreamer.se

Looks fine,but there are still some fair use images in your upload log that has no rationale. You should tag them to. You should also remove the no rationale template for the images where you have added a tag. Rettetast 19:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Okie doke. I'll check the rest as well. Tusen tack för hjälpen för resten och lycka till med artiklarna dina i fortsättningen.

Dreamer.se 19:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)dreamer.se

Fair use rationale on Jung Chang and Mineko Iwasaki pictures

Hi there. I take it you deleted the two pictures. Can you please explain why you did that? I pointed out that no free versions were available and that they should be fair use. John Smith's 22:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, also could you please explain how I should re-submit those two images (or similar copyrighted ones, as there are no free ones) with the appropriate tags, descriptions, etc. John Smith's 23:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

So basically, all fair use pictures of people are going to be deleted except in the situation you mentioned? Ok, just checking. John Smith's 09:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. Sorry for the late reply. I see that you have gotten a reply from Howcheng. Generally, images of living persons are not accepted as fair use because they are replaceable because a freely licensed imaged easily can be created. Rettetast 14:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale on Keiko Nakazawa picture

Yes, I would the appreciate the same as John Smith's request for the Keiko Nakazawa image. Please advise.

User:Buried Alien 21:24, 9 July 2007 (PDT)

Hi there. Please see the reply above. Rettetast 14:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Would you please more clearly explain what you mean (perhaps by way of example) by "free licensed image" that can be "easily created?" I am not a photographer. I am not personally acquainted with Ms. Nakazawa or anybody associated with Ms. Nakazawa. In any case, Ms. Nakazawa has retired from the adult modeling profession for nearly two decades, and has retreated into private life and has not been seen in any new, publicized photographs since her career ended in the 1980s. In light of this, I am at a loss as to how a new, free licensed image would be easily created. What alternatives are available? Please help. User:Buried Alien 14:14, 11 July 2007 (PDT)

Hi again. With fair use images illustrating living persons the question is if there is reasonably possible to create an image of the person, and not about your ability to create such an image. Osama bin Laden is maybe the best example of a person where we can't expect new images to be created. Fair use of living persons has also bin accepted where the person avoids the public and has not bin seen in a while. I don't know about this image but it seems to me that Ms. Nakazawa just have retired and therefore is out of the public eye, just like retired sports-people where we don't allow fair use. Have I understood correctly? Rettetast 21:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Rette, and thank you for your continued interest and patience. The image in question was from a commercially sold photobook featuring Ms. Nakazawa that was published in 1988. The book went out of print sometime in the early 1990s and has not been reissued. Ms. Nakazawa's public career as an adult model/actress ended in 1989, and she has not been commercially photographed since. Reasonably, that does not make a new, noncommercial photograph of Ms. Nakazawa emerging at some point in the future as impossible it would for, say Osama bin Laden, but it is unlikely. Moreover, the intent of the image is not to show Ms. Nakazawa as she might appear today as middle-aged private citizen of Japan, but to represent how she appeared at the height of her career as an adult model during the 1980s. Is there any practicable compromise we can pursue to fulfill this need? Let's continue to discuss. User:Buried Alien 15:05, 11 July 2007 (PDT)

Sorry for the late answer. I saw your query but haven't had the time to respond before now...work. You have a valid point if the intent of the image was not merely to show what Ms. Nakazawa looks like. Such an image is not replaceable. But the you run into another problem with our Non-free content criteria. Criteria number eight. Does this image "significantly increases readers' understanding of the topic". If there are something you have to illustrate and can't describe in words the image should be ok, but in my understanding the image was merely illustrating Ms. Nakazawa. In no doubt the image increased the value of the article, but in my view the image was not vital to understand it. Rettetast 19:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello again, Rette, and thank you again for your continued attention on this matter. My opinion is that the illustration in question did significantly contribute to readers' understanding of the topic, as it served not only to identify Ms. Nakazawa as a unique persona in her field, but also to illustrate the visual appeal that resulted in the success she experienced during the height of her career as descried in the article. This is information cannot adequately be conveyed via verbal description alone. Ms. Nakazawa has had predecessors, peers, and successors in her field, but was a unique persona with a unique visual appeal. The image, I believe, was helpful in distinguishing her from her colleagues and provide an understanding of her that could not be gathered from a verbal biodata report alone. There are numerous categories of persons for whom an image of their appearance would probably be unimportant to understand their significance (i.e. inventors, educators, political leaders, etc.) Given that the subject in question is a career photographic model and film actress, however, a photograph would logically supplement an essential aspect of her life and work. Please consider. User:Buried Alien. 14:54, 13 July 2007 (PDT)

I have asked Quadell for his input on the image. He is on of the Non-free content policy wonks and will hopefully give us a good answer. I feel that I'm on thin ice when it comes to WP:NFCC#8. Rettetast 22:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Rette. I'm completely out of my league when it comes to Wikipedia's criteria for permitting the use of images. I can only leave it in the hands of the authorities and hope that they will understand and ultimately agree with my perspective. We'll wait and see. User:Buried Alien 15:25, 13 July 2007 (PDT)

Greetings. This exact topic has recently been discussed at Wikipedia:Fair use review#Japanese erotic actresses. Basically, portraits of living people are considered replaceable (thus failing WP:NFCC #1) if someone could reasonably be expected to photograph her. Retired Japanese erotic actresses might allow a portrait of theirs to be taken, but they might not. One successfully sued a photographer for invading her privacy by taking her picture without her permission. If you want to use the image, you should figure out the e-mail address (or mailing address) for her former publisher and ask if you can have a freely-licensed image of her. (See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for examples.) If they say no, or if they ignore your request for months, then the consensus at Fair Use Review is that a non-free image can not be found or created in a way that won't get you sued. But if no one has attempted to get a free image in this way, then we can't assume the image is non-replaceable. I hope this helps. Notify on my talk page if you have further questions. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 01:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 28	9 July 2007	About the Signpost

Seven administrators request promotion to bureaucrat status	Board election series: Elections closed, results pending
Wikimedia Foundation hires consultant, general counsel	Newspaper obituary plagiarizes Japanese Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Ann Coulter"	News and notes: FA stats, top information site, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You have deleted almost 70% of the total text from Trinity College Dublin

For your kind information, I want to let you know, while deleting a photo from the Trinity College Dublin article, you deleted 70% of the total text. Please have a look,

• Before your edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Trinity_College%2C_Dublin&oldid=142691696
• After your edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Trinity_College%2C_Dublin&oldid=143591721

I hope it was not intentional. Niaz bd 17:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

No, of course not. This must be a bug in the automated tool Twinkle. The tool is supposed to only remove the image. I will alert the developers and check my similar edits. Thank you for the notice. Rettetast 17:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

AzaToth is asking if you could undelete the image and all associated edits to the pages and see if exactly the same will happen again. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Rettetast 19:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Article on Ranjit Naik was deleted

Article I contributed on Rnajit Naik was deleted by you. I had aslo contributed the same article for another website www.goaarsofindia.org. But the article belongs to me. Please restore it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jyotinaik (talk • contribs)

Will do. Please sign your messages on talk pages by typing ~~~~. This will automaticly produce a link to your userpage and the current date and time. Rettetast 20:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

Hey thanks for deleting my userpage, but I didn't want my talk page deleted to. --MichaelLinnear 18:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Ooops. Sorry. I have to remember to not use Twinkle for that stuff. Rettetast 19:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

image removal - chasewater watersports centre

Hi

I'm pretty new to Wiki tbh, but I can't see why you've removed the image? I have permision to use it as I know the guy that took the photo from his microlight! I did update the copyright info too.

So would you like to explain your reasons please :)

Cheers

Ashleypeake 21:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Wikipedia is partly about free content. Therefore we don't allow images that has not bin released under a free lisence such as GFDL. You can get information on how to obtain a license we can use at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Rettetast 21:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Rettetast, thankyou for removing vandalism on my user page. The IP must have really hated me seeing that he also deleted my comments at WP:RFA. Hirohisat ^Talk 09:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Color circle (hue-sat).png

Could you please restore this image. It is defiantly not a "a bit-for-bit identical copy" of an image on commons, the image on commons clearly doesn't have a transparent background, and considering its use here on en.wikipedia, the clear background is more appropriate, thank you for your time--VectorPotential^Talk 16:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. The image was incorrectly tagged by metsbot. Rettetast 17:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. --VectorPotential^Talk 17:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

EL and pro-choice

Just curious your reasoning behind adding the EL cleanup tag to Pro-choice, and was wondering what you thought of the pro-life EL section as well. Thanks.-Andrew c ^[talk] 21:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

There is way to many links there. Per WP:EL links should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article. The same goes for a pro-life. I did not have the time to check for my self which that should be included. Maybe you know more about the topic to make a selection. Rettetast 21:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 29	16 July 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Filling in with a new feature
Möller, Walsh retain seats; Brioschi elected	British agency cites Wikipedia in denying F1 trademark
Two new bureaucrats promoted	Wikipedian bloggers launch "article rescue" effort
Book review: The Cult of the Amateur	WikiWorld comic: "Charles Lane"
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Gajdusek.jpg

I'm taking a break from Wikipedia after contributing for a little over a year, specifically because of this kind of over-zealous attack on useful, and (in any other context), clearly fair use content. So if you want to mark the image for deletion, feel free. I do think it would be good of you to find a replacement if you're so certain that it's easily replaced, though. -Harmil 18:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I have the tagged the the image as disputed because of your complaint. Please provide a detailed fair use rationale where you also explain why the image is irreplaceable. And please assume good faith. Rettetast 22:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:GMC_Balayogi.jpg

From your note on the Image:GMC_Balayogi.jpg picture, it looks like I may not understand the fair use principle. Please help me in finding the appropriate tag for this image. It is a publicity photo from the Lok Saba website and it is not explicitely copyrighted at all. It would be a shame to take down this photo since it may be the only one of him. Unreal128

geoff lloyd picture

I got your message about the fair use of the picture I uploaded. You are probably right to say it would be quite easy to find a free-licensed alternative. My question is whether I am expected to track down or make the alternative? Or can I just wait for it to be deleted and someone else take up the mantle? It is not really something on which I have time to spend. --poorsod^talk 07:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)