User talk:DFWthepaleking

Welcome!

Hello, DFWthepaleking, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 21:07, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with File:DavidFoster.jpg in the infobox of David Foster Wallace article

I've reverted your changes to David Foster Wallace because they don't comply with Wikipedia's criteria for using non-free content. The image you are attempting to use is from the dust jacket of a book—which would mean it belongs to the publisher of the book. Accordingly, it is almost certainly not under a free license.

The only way that image could be used in the article is if the photographer or copyright owner "donated" the photograph and placed it under a free license such as Creative Commons. Bear in mind that if they did that, anybody would then be able to use the image for any purpose, including commercial use of the image. As a result, commercial publishers don't often donate images. —C.Fred (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the photo, you'll need to have Ellen Domke, and or the Chicago Sun-Times, email Wikimedia Commons to indicate that the photo is under a free license. (Why Domke or the Sun-Times? Because the metadata for the photo says it was taken by Domke in 1996: "2-29-96 For John Barron story...David Foster Wallace discusses his new novel, 'Infinite Jest'. Ellen Domke/Sun-Times 96-02-703".) —C.Fred (talk) 21:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You now say "connections at Little Brown" let you use the image. They will need to contact Wikimedia Commons to document that they have the rights to the image and are giving them away. You cannot give the rights away on their behalf. —C.Fred (talk) 21:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see if I can make this clearer. Did you take the picture? If yes, you can donate it to Wikipedia and open it up for the world to use. No? You must have a signed release from the photographer or copyright owner that he or she releases it into the public domain. If you don't have that the photo cannot be used. Just because someone handed you a photo does not mean they relinquished the copyright to it. Please stop your edit warring. Thank you. --Man way 21:29, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(copied from User talk:C.Fred) I said Little Brown before, LB, I think you missed that, but anyhow I'll get you that info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DFWthepaleking (talk • contribs) 21:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC) [reply]

It may not be enough that you get it to me. Little Brown may need to go directly to Commons.

Also, to make it clearer, ask yourself this question. I am allowed to take the picture you uploaded and added to the article, print it on t-shirts, and sell the t-shirts for my own profit? If the answer is no, then the image is not under a free license, and it cannot be used in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 21:38, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Again, from User talk:C.Fred) Why would Little Brown give me the photo, which I intened to use for a term paper, but can not use it here? Don't make sense check ypur facts

Because you can use it in your term paper under the Fair use doctrine, since it's for educational purposes. That does not give anybody else permission to use it, and especially not for commercial purposes. —C.Fred (talk) 21:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This not commercial purposes I'm not making any money, this is bullshit, I love DFW's work, he's brillant why all this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DFWthepaleking (talk • contribs)

You're not, but what about somebody else who uses the image? For the image to be on the Wikimedia Commons server, anybody must be able to use the image for any purpose.
Ultimately, this has nothing to do with DFW at all; this has to do with the photographer who took the picture and respecting her right to control how the image is used. —C.Fred (talk) 21:48, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk) Is not Little Brown his publisher if they gave it me I can use it. I have connections that you can dream of

May 2012

Your recent editing history at David Foster Wallace shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Man way 21:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:C.Fred. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. I know that Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation have very cumbersome copyright rules. I'm trying to make sure that the image you want to use is used fairly and in line with the owners' wishes. However, this personal attack is uncalled for. —C.Fred (talk) 21:40, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:C.Fred with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 21:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. tedder (talk) 21:52, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]