Jump to content

User talk:Ww2censor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zhukvita (talk | contribs) at 18:21, 29 January 2010 (Queen.jpg and Front1212.ipg images: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wait! If I tagged your image for deletion, read this page before posting here!
Are you here because your article was speedily deleted? Click here before leaving any message.






If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.
If I leave a message on your talk page, I will continue to discuss that topic there. Thanks.

Featured article removal candidates
Boogeyman 2 Review now
Shoshone National Forest Review now
Northrop YF-23 Review now
Emmy Noether Review now
Concerto delle donne Review now


John Henry Turpin
Photograph credit: unknown photographer; restored by Adam Cuerden
Hello, Ww2censor. You have new messages at Kchattin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Italian wikipedia

Actually the picture I uploaded to Lithuanian wiki, not italian. I understand that it looks familiat lt.wikipedia.org and it.wikipedia.org What do you mean by telling me "to clarify the status of that image"? http://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaizdas:Skulptorius,_medalininkas_Juozas_Kalinauskas.jpg What is wrong with this image? Is there any information missing? Thanks

Hello, Ww2censor. You have new messages at Germantas's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks

Thanks for catching the vandalism on Rory Gallagher's page. Did you leave a message on the offender's talk page? Well, either way, I appreciate it! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 01:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't usually bother leaving a message when it seems like a drive-by anonIP edit but if it is an anonIP with an obvious record of vandalism I will usually post a warning. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 04:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Welkom
Glens of Antrim
Whitehall, Dublin
American Motorcyclist Association
East Wall
Silvermines
Hurley (stick)
Crumlin, Dublin
Bushire
Suzuki
South Tipperary
Sydney Parade Avenue
Hibernia
East Point Business Park
Kilmore West
Munster
Gilera
East-Link (Dublin)
Gougane Barra
Cleanup
Penny Black
County Kildare
Dún Laoghaire
Merge
Drogheda
Ballymun Flats
County town
Add Sources
Grand Prix motorcycle racing
Swords, Dublin
2005 in Ireland
Wikify
Imatra
Sixmilebridge
Ark Angel
Expand
Glenroe
Early history of Ireland
Presbyterian Church in Ireland

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:47, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sock issue

What's the problem? I haven't got a lot of time right now, but I'll look at it. Reply below here, I'll watch this. JohnCD (talk) 15:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alison blocked User talk:Dubhtail, a sock of User:Garydubh. Od Mishehu declined a block removal and I left a note on his talk page because I see Dubhtail is evading the block by using at least 2 anonIP accounts, but he has not been online since. This diff to my talkpage clearly shows it to be him modifying his signature. This diff shows him replacing the same anonIP address signature with his own username after the block was imposed. Now he has also used another anonIP per this diff and this diff to my talk page. Today I now see what looks like a new sock account User:GarDubh per this diff. Most of this issue is around Talk:Republic of Ireland postal addresses. Whatever you can do to help is appreciated as I have not done any sock complaints nor any checkuser requests. TIA ww2censor (talk) 15:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Now he has given up trying to hide posting from an anonIP but signing his blocked user name manually per this edit. ww2censor (talk) 16:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked User:GarDubh indef per WP:DUCK and blocked the IP for 24 hours. There doesn't ever seem to have been an SPI report on this one, I suppose because they were so obvious: I'll take advice about whether there is any point raising one. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your help. Let me know what i need to do if you think we should start an SPI. ww2censor (talk) 20:22, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

pre 1925 images in public domain

Hi WW2Censor. I've read your informative pages and other links but what I can't find is a reasonable reason to delete the image I recently uploaded File:Car 697 1913 Princess Rd Depot.jpg.

  • It's in the public domain - I don't know that
  • It's older than 75 years (taken in 1913), - I don't know that
  • It's of public interest, - That may be true
  • It's of historical relevance, - That may be true
  • It's of a public vehicle, - That is irrelevant to copyright
  • It was taken for public use (local government in UK) - I don't know that

...also I made several personal changes to it so it could even be argued as my copyright... absolutely no-one is going to be bothered if it is used on Wiki...in fact anyone who notices will be happy that it is there....I really cannot see what the problem with it is?

I fully appreciate (and agree) that Wikipedia needs to be thorough about copyright infringement but there is no-one alive to infringe here! And I can fully understand your thorough scrutiny of images and the serious issue copyright violation but I do wonder if perhaps you are being a little overly strict here!

Any thoughts? Suggestions about what I can do to clear the image?? best wishes, Mark --Mapmark (talk) 01:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All of what you wrote above may well be true but perhaps you did not understand the deletion notice otherwise you would have realised that you did not add a copyright tag to the image and because this is missing we do not know the copyright status that you might claim for the image; that is not being overly strict. What tag, if any, are you going to add to the image? The image looks like a scan from a newspaper or magazine and this would mean it was previously published, also you have not revealed a source url, where we might see if there is any author information. Both of these affect UK copyright per commons:COM:L#Ordinary copyright. Let's see where we go from here if you can provide some additional information; the source will be a good start. BTW the burden of proofis on the uploader to provide the proof of copyright status. ww2censor (talk) 01:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah right! See where you are coming from now! I'm such a plonker. Yes indeed the image was scanned from a book which probably means that it will not pass the test. OK we better delete the image (at least from the page) until such time as I can get hold of the people who made the book. I'm guessing the image is OK if it comes from the original soucre, but yes of course I do need to check the book publishers first. Have to wait until a weekday of course. OK my mistake, and thanks for being so eagle-eyed and helpful. Wikipedia is safer in your hands!!--Mapmark (talk) 12:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What is the book and when was it published? Even then, the image may have been published previously, so some digging may help us determine if it really is a public domain image in the UK or not. I haven't heard anyone use the term plonker for quite a while, maybe I will hear it again when I go to visit my son in London! ww2censor (talk) 15:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Murray photographs

I am the photographer who took the several Anne Murray photographs in question. I have full copyright privilages on all images and have the right to post them to Anne Murray's Wikipedia page. These images were taken as promotional photographs for Anne Murray, and have appeared in a variety of media previously. However, I hold the copyright for each and every image. Thank you, AnneFan1 (talk) AnneFan1 AnneFan1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]

However, as mentioned in the notice on your page you did not tell us what specific copyright licence you are releasing the images under. Promotional or not, you must add a copyright tag to each image you upload and it must be freely licenced, which means that anyone can use it for anything otherwise it will be deleted. Generally promotional images are not freely licenced and only used under a fair-use rationale except that we don't accept fair-use images for living people. ww2censor (talk) 05:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Ww2censor. You have new messages at Od Mishehu's talk page.
Message added 07:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of image Myflower.png and Myflower2.png

Hi,

I have provided the source from which I took this image and I have uploaded its different sizes to look nice in my article. The source from which I took it has public domain images free for use. So kindly restore it from speedy deletion category. Thank you. Viralthoughts (talk) 13:42, 19 January 2010 (UTC)Viralthoughts[reply]

Hi, I noticed you flagged this image for deletion, I would like to edit it to include the necessary copyright details but I'm unaware how to do it, sorry for the trouble, but if you could help, or direct me to where I can learn how to do so, I'd be very grateful. Thanks in advance! Libleft (talk) 15:01, 20 January 2010 (GMT)

It looks like this image is a derivative work of this image: File:BlankMap-World-Subdivisions.PNG, in which case you need to say so, and as a derivative work with no significant artistic interpretation/addition you can only licence the new image with the same copyright status as the original. You don't have any greater copyright over the image than the original. All you have to do is login, click on the edit button, add a link to the original source file and add the appropriate copyright tag to the image which I think is {{PD-retouched-user|username}} in which the original username must be added. Hope that helps. ww2censor (talk) 16:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Hamburg Fire Department Page

ww2censor, you marked my pictures for not having a copyright. I took the pictures and it's my understanding I documented them correctly. You may have noticed they're the ones off the website because I took them and added them to the website! Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhfd147 (talkcontribs) 05:08, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some of you guys really make it difficult to help you because you don't provide any links to the images you want help with, per the clear instruction at the top of this edit page, and you failed to sign your post making it even more work to find you. Anyway, let's see what the problem is. The deletion noticed left on your uploaded images indicate they are missing copyright tags, a specific requirement for all images. File:NHFD5345.jpg and File:NHFD5399.jpg have this problem and even though you are the photographer, you have not told us under what copyright you are prepared to release the images to Wikipedia. Many editors uploading their own images add the {{PD-self}} template.
File:NewHamburgFireDistrictLogo.gif is a different problem. Is the New Hamburg Fire District releasing this into the public domain, if so we must have verification of this by having you follow the procedure found at WP:CONSENT because the term "free use" is unclear. If this is not the case, the image might be usable under a fair-use claim if used in the infobox of the organisation's article, so long as a fully completed fair-use rationale is completed and it complies with all 10 non-free content criteria.
I advise you to read my image copyright information page which I wrote to assist editors who have copyright problems and this post might not have been necessary if you had read it first, as suggested at the top of this edit page. Hope that helps you fix these image, if not please ask. ww2censor (talk) 05:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please follow process and be more careful

You've tagged one of my images for a speedy deletion. In your message on my talk page you said that it had no copyright information. In fact it had a copyright tag, source and a fair use rationale. Your message on my talk page was wrong. And you did not follow the correct process, please see WP:CSD F7: "Invalid fair-use claims tagged with subst:dfu may be deleted seven days after they are tagged, if a full and valid fair-use use rationale is not added."--Anon 00:00, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you got the wrong end of the stick on this one. I did not tag this image for no copyright information but for an invalid licence. While I review many images for copyright status, I very infrequently nominate images for speedy deletion based on invalid licences. If I got this wrong I am sorry, but I seem to recall there was no reasonable fair-use rationale attached to File:Hexley.png when I tagged it, neither based on a template nor on a text version similar to those mentioned at WP:FURG. If there had been one, as I see there is now, I would not have tagged it thought if the rationale was missing information, I would have tagged it as such. I also recall there was some prose that tried to justify its use based on the text on the http://www.hexley.com page though the licence text here clearly shows copyright and only a fair-use would be acceptable. The deleting editor, Fastily knows his stuff and I doubt he would have deleted it if I was wrong, as he has previously refused an occasional speedy I improperly tagged (due to a misunderstanding of a different reasoning). Anyway everything looks fine now. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 17:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image tag

Unfortunately, my original version (which was one-ninth the size of the tagged version) was since superceded by what Darius uploaded. That being said, I am going to replace it with a scaled-down version just the same, given its fair-use rationale. --JB Adder | Talk 07:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 300px size of File:Olive-extravirgin.jpg looks perfect and complies with fair-use, so all is good. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 15:53, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problems, censor. --JB Adder | Talk 03:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New section

Attention ww2censor

I have re-set the permission/licence. I have been having problem setting the license permission to the photo top right of Femi Fani-Kayode and to all the photos of Remi Fani-Kayode. Please check if the permission is set properly this time around.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tebsala (talkcontribs) 14:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All images you uploaded to the English Wikipedia have been deleted but you have uploaded them to the commons. Honestly the images don't look like they were taken in Nov 2009 as claimed. In fact seeing as how the subject died in 1995 that statement is clearly untrue. Did you really take these photos yourself at some other time or did you find them somewhere on the internet or in a book? The out-of-focus image File:Remilekun-Fani-Kayode.jpg is basically a useless image and should not be uploaded in the first place. I would be ashamed to say this was my image. ww2censor (talk) 20:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I'm a bit unsure how to go about this but I took the File:Dais6556.JPG and am the copyright holder, Thanks Hilda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilda777 (talkcontribs) 19:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added an information template to the image. You need to fill in the missing details, better description, source (you), author, (you), date (per the metadata) and most importantly you must add a copyright tag. As you took the photo yourself you may want to release the image into the public domain by adding the {{PD-self}} template to the image if that is what you want. There are other tags available in the link above, but you must choose a freely licenced one, otherwise we cannot keep the image. Hope that helps. If you complete that you can remove the deletion notice or tell me you are done and I will review it an remove the notice at that time. ww2censor (talk) 20:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How does that look now? Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilda777 (talkcontribs) 20:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That looks fine now, but please sign your post by adding four tildes, like this ~~~~ otherwise people can't find you easily. ww2censor (talk) 13:59, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for deleting the photo that I took, uploaded and inserted into the info box for the Britannia Stadium page. I was unsure of its merits so it's always good to have the benefit of an unbiased opinion. In the light of its removal I've now reinstated the photo that was there before. Keep up the good work! Russ London (talk) 09:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image for infobox

Thanks for the message; there seems to be no opposition to the idea, so I've added the feature and have left a few notes on it on the template talk page. Warofdreams talk 15:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Republic of Ireland postal addresses archives

Thanks for tidying up Talk:Republic of Ireland postal addresses and for ensuring that the aftermath of the recent disruption was dealt with calmly and effectively. — Richardguk (talk) 14:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to add the archive pages to your watchlist just in case comments are added or removed. I have too large a watchlist myself. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 14:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For once, I am ahead of you. Richardguk (talk) 15:21, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

T11 image

Hi, sorry about not providing the info on the copyright! I can verify that the image is from www.classicandperfomancecar.com, and is published by the Dennis group, which has reserved rights. however, I was able to save the image from the browser, so I believed that there was no problem (i.e. a blocker). There are no warnings about using the image, although i am not incredibly well-versed in law, etc.. Also, how do I change the copyright status, bearing in mind the computer here has a blocker that stops downloading, etc.Aubs 400 (talk) 15:18, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, I've think I've done something right, but i'm not sure; could you ok it for me? Cheers. Aubs 400 (talk) 15:31, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well you added a source but that only links to the homepage, not to the page where the image appears. The website clearly state "All right reserved" at the bottom of all pages. This looks like the image page linked from this page which clearly shows the photographer attribution to Paul Bussey. Unless you have his permission to use the image under a free licence we cannot kept it. You may find it useful to read my image copyright information page. Even when an image does not state it is copyright does not mean it is free, it must be specifically noted to be free for use to confirm its copyright status. Sorry. ww2censor (talk) 15:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but my internet prevents me from e-mailing the website to ask for permission. Shall I just ask them to delete it?--Aubs 400 (talk) 15:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The current tag will mean it will be deleted in due course by an admin, probably within a week, or you can add this template {{db-author}} to the image if you want to gone sooner. ww2censor (talk) 15:51, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help and advice; i'll do that and try and get things going again PROPERLY when I have a decent connection at home. --Aubs 400 (talk) 15:53, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you marked my images as those for deleting. I dodn't know how to show you in more efficient way that I just took the images from our own database. I took the images myself and store them in my database, I allow myself to use them in amy context I want to. So please explain me how to ipload them properly or how to edit the copywirte section while they are uploaded. It took me 3 hours to upload them so I hate seeing them deleted. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhukvita (talkcontribs) 16:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you bother to read my image copyright information page? Obviously not as it explains most everything you are asking about. Anyway, let me help you. If you had filled in all the information in the fields when uploading the image you would have stated where the image came from. If you took the images then you need to say so, if someone else took them then you need their permission. If they are from a website you need to say where and link to it, and they are such small resolution images that they look like they came from a website though they do have metadata, which makes me ask the question as to the source. You also need a description, the date the image was taken and most importantly you must add a copyright tag to the image to show under what copyright it is released. PLease fill in all the information in the template I will now add to the images for you. Many photographers use the {{PD-self}} template and you may want to use that. If it took you 3 hours to upload such small images you are doing something wrong' 5-15 minutes for an inexperienced editor would be my estimate. In fact why would you put such low resolution images online for us anyway? If you have better quality image than these, upload them over the same image by choosing the "Upload a new version of this file" button near the bottom of the image files. You should also choose better image titles as these titles mean nothing to other editors searching for useful images; someone looking for a good photo of a queen size bed will not find it. Hope that helps, if not ask again. ww2censor (talk) 17:05, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Monckton-washington-09.jpg

Erm, massive confusion here This pic was given to me by jo nova who took the pic. I have forwarded the e-mail from her to permissions-enwikimedia.org, why is this image being deleted? I went to a lot of trouble to get it, from mailing lord monckton to jo nova. What is the problem here? mark nutley (talk) 18:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Queen.jpg and Front1212.ipg images

Hi, thank you for advice. I tried uploading the footprint as you suggested, and wrote the description to the images to the best of my ability. We don't have any bigger images right now, as I shrank those to upload them easier. I deeply appreciate your help uploading the images and the text.