User talk:Alosel

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.

Dep. Garcia ^{(Talk to Me)} 20:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes! I do apologise :D! I'll do that in future. Alosel 21:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its OK, dont lose any sleep over it, cause i wont!! :-) Dep. Garcia ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Copyright Message

Hi, If you haven't already please take a quick look at Wikipedia:Copyrights, if you have already thats fine, but in a nutshell you cannot copy text from another website and add it on here.

Or use pictures that are copyrighted, unless they are pictures that you made yourself.

I hope this answers your question, and happy editing!!!!

Dep. Garcia ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the article, and that on fair use. Specifically, I have been allowed to use images by the copyright holder for use on Wikipedia. I did state this upon uploading the picture but was thus deleted. Alosel 21:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A little editors tip for you - when you tag an image with whether you made it yourself or got it off a website always tag it with the tag that you made it yourself, I know its wrong but it works and its less hassle. Any more questions im here till 10pm (UTC). Dep. Garcia ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes actually! Where can I find a link to the tags?! Alosel 22:32, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, you can find them here Wikipedia:Image copyright tags or here Wikipedia:Template messages/Image namespace. I hope you find these useful, if not please tell me straight away. - Sorry i could not answer your question sooner.

Dep. Garcia ^{(Talk to Me)} 16:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, this has been most useful! Alosel 10:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ideas about article creation

I've been reading your contributions and the articles you create are very in-depth. However you might want to check how much notability the subject of each article has- has it been mentioned in respected, particularly national press, and so on. Try and avoid writing about subjects with which you personally are closely involved or really keen on- you can edit those articles but maybe don't start them, for the reason that if it's a subject we're close to, our perspective on them isn't so clear. This will help you avoid having many articles deleted- which has happened to me so I know how depressing it is:) It would seem like I was being evil if i was to nominate it, but Pam Evans should go too, and Peace Mala is itself borderline material. You might consider merging the Pam article into there, as was considered previously. I use a basic google search to see how often something has been mentioned, and flick though a few pages to see if any of the sources are well known newspapers etc, before I start an article.Merkinsmum 17:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I get what you mean. It's just I figure these articles are gonna be there at some point or other (not a good reason I know) and I do genuinely believe that most of them do conform to Wiki standards so I try my best to find references for them and whatnot. When I create of edit and article I read back sometimes and realise that the way I've written isn't completely neutral but I try to change that as soon as I notice it... what I do hate are others who edit with the purpose of vadalising the page as has happened with some of the pages. Sorry for any trouble I've caused. ~Alosel~ | ^(Talk) 18:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course you haven't caused any trouble. I just hope it hasn't discouraged you too much and you'll keep conttributing etc- it happens to us all.:)Merkinsmum (talk) 22:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Danceofthegoblins.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Danceofthegoblins.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Stargate

Hello, Alosel! Your username, as well as the usernames of other members of Wikipedia: WikiProject Stargate, has been moved to the inactive members list, as part of a process for update the activity of the wikiproject. If you would like to continue to be an active member, please follow the instructions on the top of the participants page to add your name to the active participants list.

Thanks! – sgeureka ^t•c 16:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In general, reguarding your image uploads

In looking over your image uploads I see that many of them, while claiming to be self-published and licensed under a GFDL or CCL are "with permission" but do not have an OTRS ticket on file or claimed under fair use yet contain no rationale. Others contain no information about their source or authorship at all.

On images where you do list the author, which is not the subject(s) of the image but the photographer, I would suggest you contact them and ask they send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating their ownership of the material and their intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

Where you have taken images from websites I would suggest you contact the copyright owner and have them change the licensing information on the source page, provided it is the original source and the website owners can legally release the image, to reflect one of the acceptable free licenses. Without any proof of a free license at the original source, or without any OTRS ticket on file, the image may be considered a Copyright violation and deleted.

On images that you are claiming as fair use they can not be uploaded and licensed as "self" using GFDL or CCL. These images must meet the Wikipedia policy on Fair Use, use one of the non-free image tags and contain a valid rationale. It is important to note the unacceptable image use examples. Even though your upload of File:JaqdhawkinsWAM.jpg does not currently contain a rationale it will most likely fail fair use if one is added because, as example 8 states, "A magazine or book cover, to illustrate the article on the person whose photograph is on the cover" in an unacceptable use. Because the book cover is being used to illustrate the author in a biography of a living person it would also fail example 12 which states that "Pictures of people still alive, groups still active, and buildings still standing; provided that taking a new free picture as a replacement (which is almost always considered possible) would serve the same encyclopedic purpose as the non-free image" are unacceptable for fair use claims.

In order to allow you more time to go through your image uploads and fix any issues I will refrain from making any other noms on your images. I would advise you, however, to not upload any other images until you have fixed the existing ones and also recommend that you read the Wikipedia Image use policy and the "Uploading images" guide which contains a mini "How-To" guide.

Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 22:18, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The images which I upload are with permission of the authors, most of whom are editors of Wikipedia itself, have given their permission to use pictures to which they hold the copyright to, even if it picture taken simply on their digital camera, such as the pictures used on the Pam Evans page or the Peace Mala page, and have been asked to have them placed used the Fair-Use attribution label. Could you give any advice on the matter ~Alosel~ | ^(Talk) 02:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you have specific questions I might be able to give specific advice. Most of it is probable already answered above however. To your overall questions - if these photographers are already users why are you uploading their work? That is the first problem. You should not be uploading someone else's work as your own work. Second is that you can not license someone else's work under a free license and than claim fair use because it is a contradiction. Free means free - fair use is not free, it has restrictions. As I said above any image claimed as fair use must follow the policy on Fair Use and meet all 10 of the criteria. For example - does File:StJohnLloyd Assisi.jpg meet criteria number 1: No free equivalent or number 8: Significance? In order for it to pass number 8 you have to prove that this image will help to better understand the article text that says "During Easter 2008, thirty-seven students from St. John-Lloyd Catholic Comprehensive School in Llanelli Wales UK, traveled to Rome, Florence and Assisi on a ten day Peace Mala Pilgrimage for World Peace." and that no other photograph(s) exist from these 10 days that could better illustrate that text. You would have to establish how a picture taken in 2008 of a group of children would not be freely replaceable? What I see is a group of children standing in front of a wall and holding a sign. As it is rather nondescript in showing any location (i.e: Rome, Florence or Assisi) and being from 2008 I would feel it would be fairly easy to find another image showing the same students from the St. John-Lloyd Catholic Comprehensive School in Llanelli Wales. I would also feel, based on the age of the students and the nature of the trip, that parents or other staff would have taken photographs as well. It would be fine as a free image if the photographer (Ricky Perrott?) uploaded this himself under a free license or if there was an OTRS ticket on file but under a claim of fair use I feel it would fail. Soundvisions1 (talk) 07:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Pam Evans, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam); and,
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. Your involvement with the organization and the fact that the subject's private correspondence to you is cited as a source suggests a close involvement. Please read the guideline and proceed carefully with respect to utilizing reliable published sources and remaining neutral. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:TSDLogo.png

I have tagged File:TSDLogo.png as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. Otherwise, it will be deleted in seven days. Melesse (talk) 00:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was included in a user sub-page for inclusion in an article to be placed on Wikipedia when the new University is created. If it is deleted, can it be uploaded then, circa August 2nd? ~Alosel~ | ^(Talk) 13:12, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

R. R. Rockingham-Gill

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: R. R. Rockingham-Gill. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of R. R. Rockingham-Gill

The article R. R. Rockingham-Gill has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

claim to notability is one book for which I am not finding any reviews nor any other coverage, fails WP:N

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Active Banana (talk) 05:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo there, I've include a few publications I've found on JSTOR and reviews of Deducibility and Decidability, including the links to the articles. ~Alosel~ | ^(Talk) 10:54, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, would is possible to revert back to "R. R. Rockingham Gill", as before. The University made a typo in the staff list. After looking through the reviews and his publications, I think it can be ascertained that his name doesn't have a hyphen. Many apologies ~Alosel~ | ^(Talk) 10:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:Thomas-phillips benefactor.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Thomas-phillips benefactor.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Crest of TSD.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Crest of TSD.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TSDLogo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TSDLogo.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with File:Lampeter Buildings.png

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Lampeter Buildings.png.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F4 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:12, 17 July 2022 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 05:12, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]