User talk:Diannaa/Archive 25

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

Archive 30

GOCE report draft

Hi Dianna. Torchiest and I have developed a draft annual report. There are some items (marked tba) to fill in at 00:00 UTC, and I think Torchiest will probably want to expand the Plans for 2013. Please could you have a look and make any alterations you deem useful? I will then make the changes needed at 00:00 and ping you when it's ready to go. Is that OK? --Stfg (talk) 14:26, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I will be available to send it. Let's use the new method of delivery where we offer the subscribers a link to the material instead of sending out the whole document. I've created a topsheet that can serve as our actual mail-out. Hope you like it! see you later, off to work now. -- Dianna (talk) 15:23, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, yes, I do like it. Should we add back the customary link for drive signup, or is it best as brief as possible, do you think? --Stfg (talk) 15:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I have added it, but in a small font. See if you think this is a good version. -- Dianna (talk) 20:38, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

It's great. Thanks, Dianna. --Stfg (talk) 20:44, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dianna, it's ready to go now. Happy New Year! Simon. --Stfg (talk) 00:07, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year! Time to break out the Cointreau. Or start the bot, or something ... :) -- Dianna (talk) 00:09, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

How about a little of both? Happy New Year! —Torchiest ^talk_edits 00:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Torchie! Same to you -- Dianna (talk) 00:27, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, definitely a wee dram now! --Stfg (talk) 00:38, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

GOCE coordinator task list

Hey Dianna, if you get a chance, could you take a look here and see if there's anything else that could be added to this list? I thought it would be helpful to try and compile all the little things that can be forgotten into a single location. Thanks. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 14:48, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

It looks pretty complete to me. There's an instruction sheet at the bottom of the Drive page that lists all the drive-related tasks; you might like to point at that. — Dianna (talk) 15:41, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at Talk:Battle_of_Athens_(1946).
Message added 18:04, 1 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Toddst1 (talk) 18:04, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Todd. -- Dianna (talk) 18:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

File

Is File:Chennai Express.jpg in public domain.I dont think it is.---zeeyanketu ^{talk to me} 21:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

No, of course it is not. Good catch. I will fix this up and check out the user's other uploads. Thank you -- Dianna (talk) 21:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I tagged some files

• File:Jab Tak Hai Jaan Poster.jpg
• File:MarcellaIBelieve.jpeg
• File:Barry Evans, (actor).jpg
• File:Son Of Sardar poster.jpg and
• File:M.U.G.E.N Customized.jpg. Please delete or correct (if something wrong i have done) them too. Thanx ---zeeyanketu ^{talk to me} 22:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

All right, thank you. I will check these out right away. -- Dianna (talk) 22:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC) These have all been checked and a couple have/had non-free revisions to be deleted. All are properly tagged for action now. -- Dianna (talk) 22:31, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and Wishing you a very “Happy NEW YEAR“ filled with peace,joy, prosperity and happiness.---zeeyanketu ^{talk to me} 22:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Z! Best wishes to you too. -- Dianna (talk) 22:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Wishing you

	:)
	and hope to see your name continuing to pop up in all the important places ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Kudpung! Best wishes to you and here's hoping for a productive and low-drama year ahead — Dianna (talk) 22:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Would be nice, but doesn't look like low-drama so far, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Drama is so 2012. — Dianna (talk) 23:00, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

So you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:07, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I am very sorry that this user was not able to make the changes necessary to edit productively here. They could have been a real asset to the community, but instead they chose to repeat the behaviours that led to problems under their old username. Jesus wept — Dianna (talk) 23:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for being a reviewer in the January copyedit drive, especially since you keep yourself amused in other areas as well :-). Happy New Year and all the best, Miniapolis (talk) 02:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Miniapolis! glad to help. Happy new year to you too, and thanks for offering to help out with the GOCE! -- Dianna (talk) 02:11, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Protection Request

Hey Diannaa, hope the first day of the new year was a good one for you. Could you indef semi-protect this page for me, please? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Neutralhomer! I had a nice day, the weather is mild here for this time of year, and I accomplished things on my latest project. Hoping your year is off to a good start as well! I would like to help but am not sure why protecting it is necessary or allowed under the policy. Have a lot of your subpages been vandalised in the past, for example? -- Dianna (talk) 02:29, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Good to hear you are getting some warmer weather. 25F in Edmonton today, so that's not bad (it's 36F where I am). Anywho, yeah, I had some problems with vandalism on my subpages before, so I had them all indef semi-protected. When I make a new one, I just get that indef semi-protected as well. Saves me a headache, that's for sure. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Here we don't use that Imperial system, the metric system is all the rage (current temp is -2 °C). I know you work in some trouble zones of the wiki, so yeah, I thought that's what it was. Okay, i will protect it for you. -- Dianna (talk) 03:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I am getting better when it comes to Fahrenheit to Celsius conversion, but I have a long way to go. :) Little trivia for ya, did you know that an astronomer is responsible for the creation of Celsius? That astronomer, a Swede, was named Anders Celsius. :) Anywho, thanks for the indef semi-protection, I do greatly appreciate it. :) Hope you have a good day tomorrow. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit stalking/repeated false vandalism accusations by User:Greaymarshess

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

User:Greaymarshess is stalking my edits for all video game related articles and reverting them, calling it vandalism even though I have sources ([like this]). Other edits he's reverted are on the Playstation 2, History of video game consoles (sixth generation) and History of video games. The user also placed a "warning" template on my talk page and failed to explain what he felt I did to deserve it.

[this revert] the editor accuses me of changing dates and more vandalism (although I wasn't even the one who changed the dates in the first place). I think this person is just doing this to annoy or flame, but I'm not sure. I'd like something done about it, or in the very least get the user to stop reverting nearly EVERY edit I make on anything pertaining to video games. Also, isn't there a rule against accusing someone of vandalism unless it's blantantly obviously so?TJD2 (talk) 02:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I also contected User: Elen of the Roads about these particular incidents, but I figured since you've dealt with this user in the past, itd be a wise choice to consult you as well.TJD2 (talk) 02:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Contacting Elen was a good idea. I will write up a note for his talk page before I log off. I did notice one of your edit summaries mentioned filing at WP:SPI. If you have some data to back that up, it would be a good way to put an end to the disruption. So sorry you are having this bad experience. — Dianna (talk) 02:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you SO much! The user in question posted on Elen's talk page, and I responded accordingly. The accusation was that I used personal attacks on multiple counts (one is partially accurate, I mistook the account for a sock due to an older revision of the user's talk page, but I have since apologized for that as I've realized my mistake). I kinda feel bad about mucking up Elen's talk page.TJD2 (talk) 03:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

As you have likely already noticed, I put a note on his talk page saying much the same thing as you said over at Elen's page. That way there's a record on his own talk page that he has been warned that the activity is unacceptable. -- Dianna (talk) 03:29, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

What about his warning for removing sourced content? or his warning for adding unsorced edits? It's clear you are taking sides which is against Wikipedia policy for admins to do also you need to WP:BLOCK#NOTPUNITIVE. which states in retaliation against users; to disparage other users. Your waning was Punitive.If you leave a warning on one users page when the other users is just as much in the wrong that's punitive actions toward another user. also read Wikipedia:ADMINACCT#Accountability --Greaymarshess (talk) 04:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

You are obviously wikihounding, removing sourced content/reverting all my edits no matter what they are. Not only that, but you come on here high and mighty to trash talk an admin telling her she doesn't do her job right? Show some respect!TJD2 (talk) 05:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

well since you reverted My talk page for no reason I guess you are trying to start another fight with me. You removed sourced content less than 5 minutes ago so let's not get into that. I was not trash talking an Admin I was just telling him that he should of left a warning on your page for removing sourced content. Leave me and my talk page alone I have stopped messing with your edits so don't mess with mine.--Greaymarshess (talk) 07:19, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Diannaa, I am requesting you indefinitely block User: Greaymarshess from editing Wikipedia due to repeated counts of wikihounding, false accusations, lack of respect for admins, violating the 3RR, removing sourced content from History of video game consoles (seventh generation). If not indef. then at least temporary, because this isn't going to go anywhere. He has been constantly berating me and although above he said he'd stop reverting my work, he didn't [stop]. Notice his version isn't cited either, so he falls back on the "my version's right, take it to the talk page before it gets changed" tactic.TJD2 (talk) 07:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok everything you said is a complete and total lie I have not violated the 3RR rule, I have stopped wikihounding and I just told Diannaa He should not take sides when we are both in the wrong for fighting. you have removed sourced content from theHistory_of_video_games which is sourced but you think Me removing one sourced content by acciedent deserves an indef ban?--Greaymarshess (talk) 08:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I rest my case.TJD2 (talk) 08:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Fine then i demand you ban for making unconstructive edits, Edit Warring, Removing sourced content and for violating WP:CIV.--Greaymarshess (talk) 09:11, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

For.....I believe you are the one dragging this out Greay. I have appologized NUMEROUS times for my mistake, and you refuse to accept it. Diannaa didn't give you a satisfactory answer that sided with you so you took it to the vandalism board. They told you you were in the wrong so now you're requesting a ban. You know where this is going to end up.TJD2 (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi TJD2. He reported you at AIV, where a highly experienced admin told him his edit was essentially unsourced, and a different admin noted that your edits are not vandalism. My hope is that he will stop now; I will continue to monitor. -- Dianna (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

That was because I posted in the wrong board another admin noted his edit could be considered disruptive. Either way I would appreciate it if all 3 of us could just drop it and move on.--Greaymarshess (talk) 23:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A barnstar for you

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		Hey Diannaa, I wanted to let you know that I really appreciate the speed and work that you threw into my copyright investigation page when I was running for RFA last week, as it really meant a lot for me. I know that I am a bit tardy in this, but I have been on a well-deserved vacation from reality, and really look forward to starting back up at the end of the week, in terms of helping out with you all. Thank you again for your hard work, and I look forward to seeing your around! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Kevin. -- Dianna (talk) 23:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

December 2012 Wikification Barnstars!

		The Greater Working Wikifier's Barnstar
		Congratulations on your 5th place leaderboard appearance during the December 2012 wikification drive! benzband (talk) 15:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

		The Bronze Wikification Barnstar
		Thank you for wikifying 42 articles in the December 2012 drive.

Happy New Year! benzband (talk) 15:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit review requests

I have just completed my first extensive copyedit of Ponda, India for the January 2013 GOCE Backlog. Can you please check my edits to see how I did? Also, did I give myself the appropriate credit on the Backlog page? I've been making minor edits to WP pages for a while, but this is my first participation in a formal event like this. Thanks. Jonesey95 (talk) 22:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jonesey95! I will check over the copy edit and post some remarks on your talk page in a while. Also I will post the material to the drive page for you and give you a link to a diff so you can see how it's done. Thanks so much for your interest in helping out with copy edits. -- Dianna (talk) 22:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Your additional edits make sense; I would have made many of the same ones if my eyes hadn't been glazing over from rereading the page so many times. Jonesey95 (talk) 00:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	A million words? Awesome!!! SPhilbrick(Talk) 22:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks ~! -- Dianna (talk) 22:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Non-free reduce

Hi there Diannaa. I noticed that you add often that "non-free reduce" thing. This JPG for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gokujou_Parodius_SFC.jpg ... what's the difference between 300 × 535 and 243 × 433? I see no significant difference at all. I'm starting to feel annoyed by these non-free reduce thing because in the past months I used to upload small images, something like 200 or 220px, but then two or three other Wikipedians started to complain because the JPG or PNG were too small and asked me to upload "bigger" pictures. I don't know, but honestly, what's the criterion after all? --Hydao (talk) 08:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Hydao! The relevant content guideline can be found at Wikipedia:Image resolution. In a nutshell, the non-free content guideline for images requires us to use the smallest image that will do the job. Images should be less than 100,000 pixels to meet the guideline. So a rule of thumb is to multiply one dimension by the other, and the result should be less than 100,000. So an image that is 300 x 535 is about 160,500 which is too big by about 60% and should be reduced. For a movie poster that has a 4:3 ratio the dimensions should be about 250 x 400. The current standard for album covers is 300 x 300. The best way to get a nice clear image while still meeting this content guideline is to upload the highest quality image you can find and then tagging it for {{non-free reduce}}. Then one of the volunteers that specialises in this work will do the reduction with good or excellent results. -- Dianna (talk) 15:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh ok, thanks for the clear explanation. :) Keep up the good work. --Hydao (talk) 15:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Afgansyah Reza picture

The website in question has given permission for all photos on their site to be released under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. Yamada Taro (talk) 17:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The thing to do is to get an OTRS ticket in place on the image. The copyright holder will have to send an email to the OTRS team expressly giving us permission to use the image and specifying which license it is offered under. There's information on what to do at Commons:OTRS. -- Dianna (talk) 18:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The famous chauvinist Wiki-troll, Banned User:Iaasi returned alias User:Carpathians

The famous chauvinist Wiki-troll, Banned User:Iaasi returned alias User:Carpathians!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bingler (talk • contribs) 13:22, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Babasalichai

Hi,
I noticed you had some experience with User:Babasalichai and blocked User:Richierichriche as his sock a while ago. If you have a few minutes, could you please have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tellyuer1?
Thanks, Amalthea 18:33, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Amalthea! Seasons greetings :) I have to do some banking and other RL stuff and will get to it in a couple hours. Regards, -- Dianna (talk) 18:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

This is one that's always fascinated me. First of all, the comment from 68.174.123.10 on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tellyuer1 is classic Babasalichai prose, although he avoids the three specific easiest tells that I normally use to spot him. Second, the topic on which Tellyuer1 and its socks are commenting is one in which Babasalichai has an interest. I haven't yet checked if any known Babasalichai sock has in fact edited or commented on that article previously; nor if the article falls under COI matters relating to Babasalichai; nor if it's related to Babasalichai's curious and particular past vendettas.

I also haven't yet been through the contribs of all the Tellyuer1 accounts. Amalthea, if this is needed, can you clarify what we're looking for? Are we looking for style or content correlations between Tellyuer1 and its admitted accounts and the various Babasalichai accounts, or are we looking to have Babasalichai-style edits by the Tellyuer1 accounts rolled back; or both; or something else? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and at ANI Tellyuer1 used one of the three specific easiest tells that I referred to above. Tellyuer1 is Babasalichai, no doubt about it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Could you please post remarks at the SPI page? That way it goes into the permanent record. Thanks so much, Demiurge1000. -- Dianna (talk) 20:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both! And regarding sending me tells you noticed: yes, please. :) When in doubt I'll just ask you both again, but he almost certainly will be back soon.
Thanks, and seasons greetings to you, too! Amalthea 21:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for orphaned non-free revisions deletion

Hi! Dianna. How are you? My humble request is please delete the following non-free revisions for the files :

1. Panjaa poster
2. Rebel poster
3. Sarocharu poster
4. Seethamma vakitlo sirimalle chettu poster

Have a nice day. Raghusri (talk) 12:24, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

All done. You have a nice day also! -- Dianna (talk) 15:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you dianna. Raghusri (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Polly James

Polly James (DJ) Hi, You removed this page a while back: here is an external article on Polly: http://radiotoday.co.uk/2013/01/presenter-polly-james-to-depart-absolute/

You've got mail!

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:37, 7 January 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 02:37, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Battle of Sharon

Hi, I'm wondering if you might be able to do a copyedit on this article which has been requested by WikiCopter Returns during a GAR. I approached Dank without success. I've been reluctant to go through the normal process after a negative experience when a Guild copyeditor worked on this article on 18 July 2012.

I know this is a big ask as its a long article describing seven days of battles with reference to a number of sub articles/battles. Its also been subjected to a protracted edit war. Would you have time to take a look at it? --Rskp (talk) 04:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I am going to say no, so sorry. As it stands the article is too long (3458 words longer than Battle of Stalingrad) and overly detailed. I think this will be a barrier to passing GA that copy editing will not remedy. -- Dianna (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry you do not want to copyedit Battle of Sharon. The Battle of Stalingrad as it stands is a poorly written C-class article. [1] Length is not a criteria for GAR. --Rskp (talk) 22:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Re:Hitler article

No problem, thanks for correcting the citation style. -- Hazhk ^{Talk to me} 14:28, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Non, Je ne regrette rien

For the complete list, see User:Diannaa/Soundtrack

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFtGfyruroU

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dave McCaig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nemesis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Help delivering newsletter

Hi Dianna. Not sure exactly how it all works, but would it be possible for you to help WP:VG deliver our quarterly newsletter with your access to EdwardsBot? Our normal bot operator is MIA right now, and we're a week behind. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I will do it. If you point me at the newsletter and the list of recipients I will get started right away. - Dianna (talk) 01:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Great! I still need to put it all together, but I'll let you know when it's ready. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 01:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, the page to deliver is here, and the mailing list is here. Let me know if I can help you organize it any more if there are problems with the subscription list. Thanks a lot! —Torchiest ^talk_edits 02:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Torchiest. The newsletters are starting to be delivered, so it looks like we don't need to see any further organisation of the members list; the bot is smart enough to figure it out. -- Dianna (talk) 02:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

What a clever little bot! Thanks again. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 02:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

It's not a little bot at all. It's a big husky manly bot, FYI. -- Dianna (talk) 02:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

You have my thanks

		The TomStar81 Spelling Award
		Be it known to all members of Wikipedia that Diannaa has corrected my god-awful spelling on the page Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr., and in doing so has made an important and very significant contribution to the Wikipedia community, thereby earning this TomStar81 Spelling Award and my deepest thanks. Keep up the good work! TomStar81 (Talk) 07:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I do not know how you feel about personalized Wikipedia awards, but in light of the fact that you've been awarded the other copy editing barnstars on numerous occasions I thought I might recognize (in part) your copy edit of my addition to the late General Schwarzkopf's page with my own personal SP&G award, given in gratitude to those who fine tune the articles I edit here. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, TomStar81! --Dianna (talk) 15:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit request

Hi. Would you be able to do a ce on Niedermayer-Hentig Expedition? Got a request for it on the GA nom. It's a big article so you're free to trim where needed to, and if you're not able to that's fine. Wizardman 05:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wizardman! I will do it, but will probably have a lot of questions for you, if that's okay. -- Dianna (talk) 06:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

That should be fine. I'm actually not overly familiar with the article, but I'll answer them best I can. Wizardman 17:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Rollback

Hey Dianna, can you turn back on rollback for my account? I've got a separate account I use on my phone, so fat thumb syndrome shouldn't be a problem anymore. Thanks! —Torchiest ^talk_edits 21:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done -- Dianna (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 22:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

revdel request

Stalked you here from Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests -- please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#RevDel_requested. NE Ent 11:55, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Mr. Ent. Someone else got it done while I was sleeping. -- Dianna (talk) 15:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Pony!
Congratulations! For helping me format my pony award, you have received a pony! Ponies are cute, intelligent, cuddly, friendly (most of the time, though with notable exceptions), promote good will, encourage patience, and enjoy carrots. Treat your pony with respect and he will be your faithful friend! Montanabw^(talk) 20:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Wow! This version is gorgeous :) Thank you! -- Dianna (talk) 21:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Images

This user uploading images here unnecessarily despite warnings and spoiling articles.---zeeyanketu ^{talk to me} 10:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi zeeyanketu. I have checked over the user's list of uploads. Everything he has uploaded has now been tagged for deletion. I have also put a personal note on his talk page explaining where to find our non-free content policies. Hopefully this will end it. I will monitor and see what happens. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. - Dianna (talk) 16:07, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring Simon Wiesenthal to Good Article status. Keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Khazar2! And thanks for your wildly helpful resolution to review a Good Article nomination every day this year. -- Dianna (talk) 23:42, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure--so far it's been a lot of fun to see what active content contributors like yourself are up to. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File of Sir Oliver Goonetilleke

Hi Diannaa,

• File of Sir Oliver Goonetilleke

The above file already has permission. Pl. see

{{PermissionOTRS|id=2012063010002185 }}

Kind Regards,

From,

Anuradha

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 13:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification! So sorry about the mistake. -- Dianna (talk) 15:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Logo for the Institute for Microbial Biotechnology and Metagenomics.png

Hi Dianna,

You're going to have to forgive me ignorance but I have no idea what your message about the file I uploaded actually means.

I've been asked by my institute to make a wikipedia page for the institute (ideally similar to the Sanger Institute page). The logo image which was uploaded is the official logo for the institute and as an 'agent' for that institute I am allowed to use it. It is also in the public domain on our official website and all of our stationary.

How do I go about getting it past the wikipedia approval system?

Many thanks,

Dr. Lucas Black — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83years (talk • contribs) 06:56, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dr Black. What you need to do is get an OTRS ticket in place on the file using the instructions available at Commons:OTRS. In a nutshell, the copyrightholder has to send in an email giving us permission to use the file. Sorry about the extra work, but Wikipedia takes copyright quite seriously, so we have to be sure we have permission for the images on display. -- Dianna (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Fiery serpents

Could I get a little expert guidance on this one.....? I was trying to do a CE, but found the refs (book titles) to be in Polish or Russian.....not sure what to do/where to go on this one. I could always just abandon it........ --Bddmagic (talk) 16:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

There's an article on the Russian wiki: ru:Огненный змей but it does not appear to be a direct translation. Normally I personally attempt to carry on using the article from the other wiki and Google translate to try to piece it together. But it might be beyond the scope of what copy editing alone can solve. If you decide to leave it, you might consider removing the copy edit tag and placing a {{GOCEreviewed}} template on the talk page, so someone can return and copy edit once the other issues are resolved. -- Dianna (talk) 22:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

File permission issue for File:Residence of Mr. A. D. Henderson, Suffern, N.Y.jpg

Dianna,

I have sent permissions-en@wikimedia.org the email granting me permission to use the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Residence_of_Mr._A._D._Henderson,_Suffern,_N.Y.jpg image. Below is a copy of that permission:

"After talking to the staff and people involved in the Hudson River Valley Heritage website, they advise that this is in the public domain, so you should be able to use it without any permission. I would just list Suffern Free Library as the source. Sorry for the delay. I haven't had this come up here before! Will get back to you about the newspapers. Hope you havea nice weekend, Carol Connell Cannon - SUF"

Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do to stop removal of this important postcard depicting the residence of Alexander D. Henderson in Suffern, New York. --Greg Henderson 14 January 2013. —Preceding undated comment added 05:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Mr Henderson! I have removed the deletion template for now, as the email might take a while to be reviewed by the OTRS team. As is common everywhere on this wiki, there's backlogs of things to do. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Best, -- Dianna (talk) 05:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Is Diannaa the same person who is Dianna the editor of the Rudolf Hess Article?

I have tried to link with Dianna regarding the Rudolf Hess article but get Diannaa with two a's at the end instead--so I will assume this Diannaa is the same as Dianna who is dis-satisfied with my using Dr Hugh Thomas' book "The Murder of Rudolf Hess" as a reference. Are you not aware that this book was written by one of the very few Medical Doctors and Surgeons ever to have had an opportunity to examine the prisoner called Rudolf Hess at Spandau? He is not some kook, who made up some story about how secret agents strangled 93 year old Hess. In 1979 when this book was published Harper & Row was a very respected publisher known to thoroughly vetted Dr Thomas as legit. The facts he uses in his book other than about the wounds and physical exam are also vitally referenced. Why is it that when I ask for a citation to a clearly speculative statement in the RH article are my citation requests deleted by you? Why is it that when I give a reference from a thoroughlt vetted author of a thoroughly respected publishing house am I accused of adding unreferenced material when I have in fact stated where my info came from? You consider the "double conspiracy theory" of Hess to be fringe conspiracy theory (your words) and yet you allow unreferenced 70 year old Nazi propaganda and misinformation to be gospel without need of any citation or reference? I am not saying you are some closet nazi, Dianna, but people who have kept up with the history of WW2 and more recent knowledge of the Ultra Secret decrypt efforts involving enigma, etc. since the mid 1970's have very good reason to feel that some odd sounding theories of events of WW2 are in fact quite true; and W. Hugh Thomas' book is one of those odd sounding events that in the light of day has a certain ring of truth. In response to your insulting actions and WARNING, I respond that you are correct in the fact that the Rudolf Hess article is in need of major re-do's; however, I am not part of the problem--rather trying to be part of the solution. I have read pretty much all the books about Rudolf Hess and his "trip to Scotland" written in English, and the only one with all the facts wrapped up tight is the Thomas book published by Harper and Row in 1979. Wikipedia is not about calling respected publishing houses vetting procedures lunatic fringe, or disregarding and deleting similarly referenced additions because they do not fit into your vision of the topic. Similarly, when well entrenched misconceptions on a topic are challenged for a citation or reference, quite simply they need to be cited or deleted. All I have done is request citation/reference for commonly held ideas on this topic that I have researched and found to be faulty or old WW2 propaganda. Get a copy of The Murder of Rudolf Hess by W. Hugh Thomas and read it well Dianna, for there lies the truth. Dunkmack9 (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you have reached the correct user. I am conversant with topics on Nazi Germany and don't believe the conspiracy theories propounded in the book you read have any factual basis. Have you read anything by Albert Speer? If the man at Spandau was a fake, surely Speer and the other inmates (or all the top Nazi brass present at the Nuremberg trial, for that matter) would have noticed. This is a fringe theory put out by one man only as a way to sell books, and serious historians such as Kershaw, Evans, and Beevor don't mention it. The fact that the publishing house is reputable is irrelevant; they are in the business of selling books, not vetting them for historical accuracy. Please stop trying to insert this fringe theory into the article. Any further discussion should take place on the talk page of the article please, not here. -- Dianna (talk) 06:14, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:The First Intraocular Lens, invented Ridley and made by Rayner made in 1949.png

Diannaa, Thank you. In fact I would like this file deleted, for two reasons,

1 The image is wrong - it is not a photo of a lens but of a book cover. This is my fault. (In my defence, this is the first time I tried to upload an image.)

2 As you point out, I do not have the proof that the creator agreed to license it. Unfortunately, he is no longer alive.

Can you advise how I can delete it? I'd like to start again and find a properly licensed image.

Thanks for helping me.

--Teckelberg7 (talk) 11:58, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Teckelberg7! The image will be automatically deleted by a patrolling administrator on January 21. Or, if you would rather not wait, you can place a tag {{db-author}} and someone will delete it within a few hours. Best wishes, -- Dianna (talk) 12:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

images included in article "D. Dudley Bloom", American businessmen

Diana, Wikipedia may and should be careful about copyrights but in this case it failed to make a phone call that would have ascertained that the company Bloom worked for and that published the four images I've used in its toy fair catalogs each spring and fall hasn't existed for fifty years, and the images I used in the article were originally taken by photographers working for the company that were also owned by the company that no longer exists, not the photographers. The photos are really "documents of historical interest" that no one but the eBay seller who's hocking them owns, which is why it was the eBay sellers I asked permission from. The original photographers never owned the photographs; the company did, and the company hasn't existed since 1962. Its trademark name was used into the 1970s by another company that no longer uses it. You can look these facts up.

I asked for and received permission to use each and every photograph in the article from the one and only owner alive. If I have cited "Bloom family", the photo is owned by my family and me. The photographers and owners of the images of toys, luggage, and tape recorders I used on the page were asked for permission to include them and gave their permission freely and, I might say, enthusiastically in every case. Also in every case, I quoted verbatim the emails that granted me permission in the "file description" of each image.

There is nothing more needed from these owners, most of them either webmasters of websites or eBay sellers. Neither is more needed from me as far as I can tell. To pursue the matter further is a disservice to every reader of Wikipedia, to me, and to the subject of the article.

Why didn't you look up Amsco yourself rather than making false accusations on my page? That's your job, not mine. You're paid to do that. I'm donating my time voluntarily, and frankly I suspect my time is more valuable than yours. I'm angered and want answers now.

Please respond to this note immediately either at this page or to my email address at <redacted>. It's Tuesday morning at 8:11 am EST. Thank you.--Richard Barnett "Dick" Bloom

Actually Diannaa isn't paid to do that; she's a volunteer editor just like you and I are. She may, for all I know, sometimes engage in making phone calls to try and sort out licensing issues for images that other people (e.g. you) have uploaded - but many other editors, including myself, don't.

I'm not at all convinced by your logic in saying that images owned by a company that later ceases to exist, are then owned by "no one but the eBay seller who's hocking them".

Getting angry is generally not the best way to approach editing Wikipedia. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Demiurge for your remarks. Mr Bloom, Wikipedia is very careful about copyright; it's a Wikipedia policy with legal ramifications. All images, with a few exceptions, are automatically covered by copyright until such time as the creator passes them into public domain or releases them under license. If you go to commons:Commons:HIRTLE there's a chart that gives information on when items fall into the public domain. For an example, let's look at the image File:ST for W.jpg. What we have here is a photograph taken by an unknown photographer. If the picture has previously been published, it depends whether or not it was published with or without a copyright notice. It is up to you, the uploader, to prove prior publication in a book or magazine, and whether or not a copyright notice was attached. It's not up to me, the Wikipedia administrator, to disprove it. So we have to assume the image was never published anywhere before its upload here, and the date of death of the photographer is unknown. Given these assumptions, this particular image would fall into the public domain 120 years from its date of creation.

Let's look at one of the images from the Amsco catalogue as another example: File:Amsco hichair.jpg. Contrary to what you have indicated on the file, the copyright is not owned by Heidi Ann of the Internet blog "Gold Country Girls". The copyright is owned by the person who created the image, or they would have transferred their rights to Amsco as part of their contract to do the work. You can see by the Hirtle chart that material published with a copyright notice in the United States between 1923 and 1977 has fallen into the public domain if its copyright has not been renewed. Material published between 1923 and 1977 without a copyright notice is already in the public domain. It is up to you, the uploader, to prove the date of publication and whether or not it was originally copyright and whether or not the copyright was ever renewed. Likely the entire catalogue was copyright when it was issued, and a copyright notice was placed on the material somewhere. It would not appear on every page of the catalogue. Records on copyright renewal are available from the United States Copyright office. What you have to do is determine whether or not the material was originally copyright, and determine whether or not the copyright was renewed by searching the copyright office records. There's licensing templates to the right on the Hirtle chart. Please mark the results of your searches on each file and add the appropriate license template. Don't remove the deletion tags yourself please; an administrator will remove them once they have checked your work.

I am not a paid employee; I am a volunteer like yourself. Recently I have been specialising in copyright law as it pertains to images, and I have had a very high accuracy rate on my decisions. For the most part, my tagging will be correct. But you don't have to take my word for it; a different administrator with experience in this area will review the images again in a week and check over my work and delete any images that do not yet have the required proofs or permissions in place. Copyright law is very complex, so please feel free to post here again if you have any further questions or comments. But I will be unable to respond for some time, as I have to go to work now. I have removed your email address; it's a bad idea to post it on Wikipedia, as spammers scrape this site looking for people to spam. -- Dianna (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC

I contacted the owner of the images, who sells them by the paper page on eBay, and she told me she'd clipped the ads "from an old magazine". On follow up I learned that the images were taken from an advertisement the company published in the November 16, 1953, edition of "Life". All Life Magazines are now in the public domain, as they are accessible for free on Google Books. The ads are not attributed to an individual photographer or artist; only to the name of the company at the bottom of the page, "American Metals Specialties Corporation". The company has not existed since 1962 and its trademark has not been used since the 1980s. I will post the fact that the images included in the Wikipedia article are taken from Life Magazines from the 1950s and when possible will cite the exact dates of publication. Please run these facts by your administrator associate. I'd appreciate being contacted before further notations and/or deletions are made. Thanks for your help. --Dick Bloom, user name Rbbloom.

I've just been advised that the relevant law for non-profit use of images like these ads, which are used exclusively for educational purposes and not copyrighted, is codified in Title 17 of the US Code of Regulations and elaborated by the US Copyright Office at its website as follows:

One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

<the editor here made an extensive quotation from the law>

I've placed a call to Time Warner Company (which owns the Life Magazine trademark) Legal and will let you know what they say.

--Rbbloom 10:05 am January 17, 2013.

You can tag images for fair use if you want, but normally their use is restricted to one or two such images per article per our non-free content policy (criteria 3a - minimal use). A better strategy might be to prove that the images are in the public domain by searching for renewal of copyright by searching the US copyright office online database, like was suggested to you before. Images published between 1923 and 1979 without a copyright notice are public domain. Images published between 1923 and 1963 that did not have their copyrights renewed are public domain. Just because something is available online does not place it in the public domain. The copyright is still subject to the same rules as usual. -- Dianna (talk) 15:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Diana, all but four of the images I've used on this site are either (1) owned by me or (2) images owned by eBay sellers of vintage consumer products which they themselves produced with their own cameras and gave me permission to "fair use", so their copyright owners have each, individually, granted me fair use of them and I've quoted them verbatim on that. The four Amsco toy ads in the first section (showing little boys and girls) are all apparently taken from Life Magazines. Although the magazine content was copyrighted by Life, the ads were attributed only to Amsco, not to photographers, and Amsco went out of existence in 1962; even a copyright renewal would have expired in 1979. I've put in a call to Time Warner and am waiting to hear what they say. As for the others, there's no ground for litigiousness whatsoever.

My main question--my only question--for you is: should I call the images (1) owned either by me or an eBay owner and (2) owned by Life Magazine "historically significant" fair use or "promotional material" fair use? --Rbbloom

Sorry, Mr Bloom, but you are wrong. The copyrights on the images are owned by the people who created them. In the case of the photographs such as File:Bloom and Shirley Temple.jpg and File:Barrie.JPG the original photographer or their heirs are the copyright holder. If the photographs have never been published in a book, magazine, or newspaper, they do not fall into public domain until 120 years from date of creation. In the case of the advertisements from Life Magazine, the copyright is owned by either the creator of the image or the company for whom they created the image. Please look again at the Commons:Hirtle chart, or if you prefer, this similar chart from Cornell University. If the advertisements appeared in the magazine without a copyright notice between 1923 and 1977, it is now in the public domain. If the material was published with a copyright notice between 1923 and 1963 and the copyright was never renewed then the material is in the public domain. It is up to you, the uploader, to prove the date of publication and whether or not it was originally copyright and whether or not the copyright was ever renewed. This is done by searching for the material in the online data base of the United States Copyright office. -- Dianna (talk) 23:44, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Joachim Peiper

Diannaa: when you have the time, I would ask you to look at the above article and its very recent edit history. A slow-motion edit war is percolating with a new user who is POV pushing. I will wait to revert his most recent additions. Thanks, Kierzek (talk) 14:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Kierek. I will make a note to check this out and will get to it as soon as I can. -- Dianna (talk) 15:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but no need now; it has been handled; the editor in question has been blocked. Kierzek (talk) 17:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion notice

I see that you added a deletion caption to three images on St. Peter's Episcopal Church (Geneva, New York)

I processed an OTRS permission statement that referred to all three. In the case of the info box image, permission was required and supplied. I added the OTRS template.

The other two appear to be old enough to qualify as pd, so I left the license as pd, and did not attach the OTRS template, but removed the deletion notice.

I was to make sure you are in agreement, and I am not missing a reason for deletion of the two older images.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:03, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

The images have to have been published prior to 1923; that means that they have to have been issued as a postcard or appeared in a book or magazine. Or they have to have been produced prior to 1893 (120 years ago). The uploader states the pic was taken in 1860. So yeah, in my opinion File:StpGeneva.jpg is PD but it should be templated as {{PD-US-unpublished}} (a template which does not actually exist on this wiki but is available at the Commons) rather than {{PD-1923}}. For the other image, File:DrJRankin.jpg, we don't have a date that the image was produced and we have no proof of publication. The reverend was alive as recently as 1896, so this image could theoretically still be under copyright; without more information we just don't know. -- Dianna (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm kicking myself for not seeing that myself. I know I missed the taken/published distinction some time ago, but it came up recently, so I should not have missed it. I'll try following up with the uploader. --SPhilbrick(Talk) 22:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Wiki too hard ;/ No need to delete, since the OTRS ticket covers all three pics anyways. -- Dianna (talk) 22:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I've taken care of the first, moved it to Commons, and replaced the license with the correct one. The uploader believes that while the exact date associated with the other image is not identifiable, it may be possible to affirm that it occurred prior to 1892 (there apparently are some records indicating how long it has hung in the church, those will be reviewed, and used if they affirm that it was handing in the church, therefore taken, prior to 1892).

I wrote this before seeing your answer above. I agree, I could reply on the assertion of copyright, but I'll use that as a fall back if I cannot get the cleaner answer.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 23:58, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I now have affirmation that the second photo was taken before 1892, so I moved the image to Commons, changed the license to the correct one, and added the OTRS template pointing to the affirmation.

Thanks for you help.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I am gonna see about geting that {{PD-US-unpublished}} template copied over to this wiki. -- Dianna (talk) 15:21, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Good idea, as I can't think why it wouldn't apply here.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Images at Lynn Garrison

Howdy! I don't work with images a lot so I'm not really sure what this means. Are they listed somewhere for deletion or is there a particular rationale for their deletion? I couldn't work it out. Cheers, Stalwart111 23:23, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Stalwart111. For File:Lynn Garrison in cockpit of RCAF Mustang 9279, July 1956.jpg there's no source and no evidence of permission of the original photographer. It will have to be deleted unless the original photographer can be identified and his permission obtained. For File:Avro Lancaster FM-136 22 Feb 1961 Lynn Garrison coolection.jpg Lynn Garrison is named as the author of the photo, but there's inadequate evidence that he's given permission to use the photo here. The uploader can resolve the second image by asking the original photographer to send an email to the OTRS team using the instructions at Commons:OTRS. -- Dianna (talk) 23:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your very fast and comprehensive response. In both cases, the creator is the same and I think the creator (see article history) has a rather... obvious... conflict of interest. I don't think getting the required permissions is going to be a significant problem at all. Do I have your permission to copy your response above to the article talk page (to get that ball rolling)? Cheers, Stalwart111 23:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, that would be great. It would be a pity to lose these historic images. Thanks -- Dianna (talk) 23:47, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Agree, but I think it can be resolved. Will copy your message there. Thanks for your help! Stalwart111 00:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Deleted Image at John Hanlon (record producer)

Hello Diannaa,

In September you deleted this 2012 color photo of John Hanlon working a mixing board...

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 August 30#File:John hanlon.jpg

...from the John Hanlon (record producer) page that I built.

Yesterday, the photo's copyright holder Ben Johnson completed the "permissions" form letter and emailed it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, allowing me to publish his photo under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0."

What other steps must I take now to undelete the photo?

Thanks, Pcaabplroa (talk) 01:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I am not a member of the OTRS team so I do not have access to the system or know much about its inner workings, but I think a member of the OTRS team will undelete the photo for you once the email is reviewed. Please be patient, though; just like many areas of the wiki, there's backlogs of stuff to do. -- Dianna (talk) 05:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

(tps) I processed the OTRS permission, restored the image and added it back to John Hanlon (record producer). --SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Dianna (talk) 15:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

THANK YOU! THANK YOU! The file history for John_hanlon.jpg shows two older images that I would like to delete. How can I do this? The permissions letter doesn't cover them. Pcaabplroa (talk) 17:50, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done Bada-bing, bada-boom. -- Dianna (talk) 19:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

This IP 69.246.10.88

Hi Dianna, would you mind dealing with this. He used some bad language against me on another talk page so I warned him and now he is making all sorts of accusations. Thanks SH 14:01, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I have seen these arguments before! You are a brave man to edit in such a volatile area of the wiki. While I agree with your removal of the article talk page comments, I would categorise his remarks more as "unconstructive" rather than "vandalism". I will watch-list the article and your talk page and will issue him a warning if there's any comments that are direct personal attacks. -- Dianna (talk) 20:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Dianna. Sometimes I wonder why I bother, but then I read poor wiki's like Sikhiwiki where every krank and fanatic seems to have a free run and think I must uphold the values wikipedia stands for. Thanks SH 10:40, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Robert Burns HARPO PIZZA

Hi Diannaa. When I go to the Robert Burns article, I see the text "HARPO PIZZA" written above the start of the article text. I can't find the string "HARPO PIZZA" when I edit the article. Is this conundrum something you can unravel? Cheers. GFHandel ♬  20:48, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Looks like you loaded the page at just the wrong time: the history shows ClueBot reverting the vandalism within about a minute of its appearance.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:32, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but please note that "HARPO PIZZA" is still there, and another reader has reported the same on the talk page. I opened the article in a different browser (that had never been to the article) and I see the same text (so I doubt it has to do with caching). GFHandel ♬  21:49, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I am not seeing the "HARPO PIZZA" vandalism either; perhaps someone cleared the server cache. I did so just now, just to be sure. BTW, I wish I woulda thought of the username "Epic Harpo"! You may all call me Epic Diannaa in the future. -- Dianna (talk) 23:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Weird. I was at work (using an ancient version of Firefox) earlier; I’ve just tried three different browsers here at home (oldish versions of Safari, Firefox, and Opera—not logged in on the latter two), and don’t see it in any of them. I even tried searching the source code in each one: nada. (Of course script-generated or oddly encoded text wouldn’t show up there.) Although thoroughly ignorant about such matters, I’m inclined to agree that it must have been a cached version you were getting. (Does WMF operate different servers for different regions? If so, that might explain why some saw it lingering and others didn’t; I believe Diannaa and I are practically neighbours.) Diannaa, how does one clear the server cache? Or did you just mean your browser’s? I observe that to a Greek (which I’m not, handle notwithstanding) “EPIC” would read as the Goddess of Discord.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:30, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Click on the Edit link and change the url from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Burns&action=edit to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Burns&action=purge and save the page. This will clear the server cache and force the most recent version to appear. It's also handy for when you want to check something (such as your talk page or a drama board) and don't want to log in because you are at a public wifi or at work or such. — ►►—Diannaa—► ^会話 05:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks; good tip!—Odysseus1479 (talk) 08:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

It's gone now. I'm convinced it wasn't a cache problem on my computer because I tried it with two different browsers (one of which had never been used to access the article). I'm in Australia, so it might have been something to do with server replication. There was definitely a problem though because the bot fixed the vandalism within one minute of it occurring and the anonymous editor posted on the talk page almost two hours later to observe the same thing that prompted me to post here (five hours after the bot revert). Anyhow, it doesn't matter now because it's all good. Perhaps I too should adopt an epic handle? — GFHandel ♬  05:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

You might be on a different server, but if you are logged in, you should not see a cached version. So I don't know what went wrong. Re: your epicness, did not Handel write The Messiah? Perhaps you could cook something up that plays off that. (or would that be in bad taste? probably.) — ►►—Epic Diannaa—► ^会話 06:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Epic Diannaa I saw the pizza too, while logged in. Clearing my browser cache removed it (I didn't know the action=purge trick). Here's a little DYK from your friendly local music pedant: Handel didn't write The Messiah -- he just wrote Messiah. Cheers, Simon. --Stfg (talk) 09:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Sven Peter.jpg

I have already forwarded the reply from Sven giving written permission and the file itself was updated to reflect that, but you have marked the image for deletion anyway ? Parlane (talk) 00:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The deletion template was removed by User:Sphilbrick on 15 January, when he added the OTRS ticket. If you are still seeing a deletion template on this file, perhaps you are viewing a cached version of the page? Everything looks in order to me. -- Dianna (talk) 00:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Weidling and the 56th pzr corps

• Hi there. Would like to discuss our recent edits in the Fuhrerbunker article re Weidling and minor related stuff. Left some thoughts on talk page. Cheers Irondome (talk) 02:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you

	The French Barnstar of National Merit
	For your devotion on french related articles.Steve92341 (talk) 13:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
	this WikiAward was given to Diannaa by Steve92341 (talk) on 13:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Dianna (talk) 00:23, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

GOCE mid-drive newsletter, January 2013

Guild of Copy Editors January 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter We are halfway through our January backlog elimination drive. The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for the deletion of Orphaned non-free revisions

Hello Dianna.

My humble request is, please delete the Orphaned non-free revisions for the following file :

Seethamma vakitlo sirimalle chettu poster

Actually what happened was, i uploaded a lot of new versions but image is not displaying may be it's a Glitch.

So i removed the link from SVSC article and tagged it with CSD F5.

Again i uploaded another file using Toolbox and added it in SVSC article.

Although it is tagged with CSD under F5 category and scheduled to be deleted on January 23, 2013 being not used in any articles, If possible please delete the file madam.

Have a lucky day and happy editing.

Raghusri (talk) 09:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Sometimes there's problems with the Mediawiki Software and the images or their thumbnails do not display correctly. When this happens, sometimes it helps to clear your local cache using the instructions at Wikipedia:Clear your cache#Bypass browser cache, instructions for various browsers. If this doesn't work, you can try clearing the server cache using the instructions above in the section User talk:Diannaa#Robert Burns HARPO PIZZA. Sometimes neither of these works, and I find that if I wait a day or two the problem corrects itself on its own. I hope you too have a lucky and interesting day. Best. -- Dianna (talk) 15:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

First of all thank you for the deletion, understanding me and the problem. Yes Dianna. What you said is absolutely right. Some thing wrong with Media wiki software. Have a good day. Raghusri (talk) 10:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Referencing: harv versus sfn

Missed

Hi Diannaa. A debate has popped up here regarding my use of the {{sfn}} referencing/citation mechanism. I'm not necessarily looking for input there, however I would be interested to read your opinion here. I have keenly absorbed the advice of yourself, Br'er Rabbit (RIP), and others regarding reference and citation schemes, and thought I had a go-to system with sfn; however now it seems that harv-based templates would be more "up to date". I really don't care either way, but I would like to settle on a system that is both powerful and non-controversial when used. Is there a good debate page that lists the various schemes and pros/cons? As always, thanks for any assistance that you can provide. GFHandel ♬  20:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I will comment over there. I was hunting through my archives for something comprehensive, but couldn't find it. There's a lot of useful tips at User talk:Br'er Rabbit/Archive, but nothing comprehensive. -- Dianna (talk) 21:07, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I am making a list at User:Diannaa/Citation templates that lists the advantages of sfn templates and citation templates in general. -- Dianna (talk) 00:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your learned input. I think the list idea is excellent and should be extended quite a bit. I would like to get a brief example of syntax and result in there (perhaps in a section with a distinct background colour). It would also benefit from diffs that show examples (preferably small articles so that the examples are not overwhelming). GFHandel ♬  08:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Eva Braun is short (2000 words) and uses books as sources almost exclusively, so it might be a good example to point people at for a finished product of that type. We need to find a shortish one that uses mostly journal articles. I was looking at the outer space stuff that TMA-1 did but there he was converting citations to {{cite doi}} templates that could be used in a suite of articles, which is well beyond the scope of what most of us are prepared to do. I will keep looking, later. -- Dianna (talk) 15:51, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

The Handel flute sonatas might work, or if we could find a similar little article that has not been converted yet, that would be even better, something that could be edited with an eye toward making nice clean diffs for educational purposes. -- Dianna (talk) 16:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

More Green trouble

Hi again. As you've probably noticed, I managed to get the Danny Green article to a standard so that all the text is consistent with reliable sources (and it was quite a lot of work). Unfortunately, now that your page protection has expired, a POV-pusher has returned and is persistent in wanting to introduce unreliable and biased opinion text. It is important that editors contribute, however I'm pretty determined to ensure that the article remains consistent with reliable sources. What is the best way to go about that? Now that the article has achieved a high standard of sourcing, is it a candidate for Pending Changes (at least for a little while)? GFHandel ♬  08:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I have placed the pending-changes protection for two weeks to try it out. Let me know if semi-protection is required instead. I have put a customised message on the IP's talk page. Best, -- Dianna (talk) 15:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

File:The Battle of Algiers poster.jpg poster

Fair use posters can be any size as long as only one of the dimensions exceeds 300px. Film Fan (talk) 10:23, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

The content guideline at WP:Image resolution call for the overall size of the image to not exceed 100,000 pixels. For this particular image, the size is 300 × 517 (155,100 pixels), or about 55 per cent larger than called for in the guideline. Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Multimedia is the source of the rule of thumb that you quote, but rules set by a local wikiproject do not trump a more official site-wide guideline such as the non-free content criteria. -- Dianna (talk) 16:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

That 100k figure is deeply approximate, is intended to be precise to only one significant digit, (0.1 megapixels) and subject to justification on a per use and per image basis. I'm the editor that pushed for pixel-count guidance in WP:NFC policy, and it was added under mild protest, and with the fairly broad consensus that it shouldn't be used as any sort of rigid limit. I have been on both sides of the reduce issue many times, and I recommend balancing fair use minimalization against the content and intent of the publisher. Here, it's a promotional poster intended for publicity, and has detail which IMHO justifies going a bit above 100K, so I would pass the 0.15 megapixel version without complaint. Especially since DashBot would have dropped it to 0.16 MP. I do suggest that the illegible text be replicated in the image description section. All that said, I would not have reverted Diannaa's reduction, nor would I now revert the 300x version. It's fine, let's all just be mindful of not abusing the broad intention of WP:NFC in either direction. --Lexein (talk) 17:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional information. I was working on images last night, and I found that the reductions done by DashBot and by users such as User:Mephistophelian who do the reductions manually were of really good clarity and has a high degree of detail in spite of the lowered pixel count. But it's not worth edit warring over, imo. -- Dianna (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC) In my experience, the best way to get a super clear result is to upload the highest-pixel version you can find, and then get one of these experts to do the reduction for you. -- Dianna (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand why there are different guidelines with conflicting information, but thanks for clearing that up. Film Fan (talk) 20:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a wiki, anyone can edit the guidelines too, lol. But in all seriousness, my understanding is that a "policy" overrides a "guideline" which overrides local guidelines laid down by wikiprojects. And the WP:Five Pillars are über alles. -- Dianna (talk) 20:08, 20 January 2013 (UTC) Just one more note: DashBot is dropping images to .104 megapixels, not .16 as noted by Lexein. -- Dianna (talk) 22:54, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh? Hm. It has done a variety of resizes over time, then, currently ~1.088 or less. My reductions rock, btw, and I'm not an absolutist where rules eschew absolutism, so I'm just I struggle to be nicer. ;) --Lexein (talk) 23:32, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

— Dianna (talk) 23:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

(Revised in light of my recent edit history. That didn't take long. :/ --Lexein (talk) 02:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC))

You are such a badass. -- Dianna (talk) 02:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit warrior

Hi Dianna. User:Shoebrz is slo-mo edit warring at Naugawan Sadat. A clue to the nature of the goings-on may possibly be found by searching the article text in its current form for the string "Shoebrz". It's an SPA. Anything you can do, please? Cheers, Simon --Stfg (talk) 20:37, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I've removed his addition as unencyclopedic and will watch-list the article, permanently I expect, as he has been at this for years :/ and I put a note on his user talk page. — Dianna (talk) 21:30, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Dianna. Hey ho! --Stfg (talk) 00:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rudolf Hess, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lorraine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Zila.jpg

Hi,i do not understand how this file can be own work although it is from commons.---zeeyanketu ^{talk to me} 20:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Seeyanketu. Movie posters are non-free and the file should not be on the Commons. I ahve nominated it for speedy deletion over there and have made a local copy and will put it into the article in a minute. Thanks for your alertness. -- Dianna (talk) 20:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Duquesne Gardens wall.JPG

Hello,

In regards to the image of the Duquesne Garden wall. I took the picture of the wall with my Android during a recent visit to Consol Energy Center. The artwork that is attached to the wall, with their respective permission info, are already listed on Wikipedia and Commons for various articles regarding the Duquesne Gardens, Pittsburgh Pirates (NHL) and Pittsburgh Hornets. This is really just a wall inside of a public building that adds and showcases to the history of the article in question. If there is still a licensing issue, please let me know and work with me to correct this. Thanks. Pennsylvania Penguin (talk) 14:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

For two-dimensional works such as photographs, the copyright protection enjoyed by the original work is still in effect when you photograph them. Each work will need to be identified and its copyright status ascertained. This information should be placed on the file so anyone looking at the file can see that we have the right under law to display it here. -- Dianna (talk) 15:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Copyright

Hi yeah sorry for uploading the wrong file. Thevoicehelper — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thevoicehelper (talk • contribs) 02:29, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

2012 Delhi Gang Rape case protection expired

Hello, The protection at 2012 Delhi gang rape case has expired. Do you mind looking into it, and reapplying the correct protection levels? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:56, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have now had time to check this over and it looks like most of the IP edits and edits from unconfirmed users are okay. There was one really bad unsourced edit but it was from before the pending changes protection wore off and was removed by an established editor. There's information starting to come in about the legal aspects of the case now, so I think leaving it unprotected would be the way to go right now. If you disagree, please post a request at WP:RFPP and another admin will have a look. -- Dianna (talk) 04:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Good Evening Diannaa

I am here in regards to a note that I received from you regarding File:ER Kvaran Sri Lanka, mid 1950s.jpg. I'd like to explain the circumstances and hear what you have to suggest. I have already sort of discussed the issue with my copyright guru/adversary User:ronhjones [[2]]. Sort of, mostly it is about another picture from the carpcchives, but this one is mentioned by me. . It goes like this. I am my family's archivist and this picture is from there, the Caldwell Kvaran Archives, sometimes known as the carpchives. This is a picture from there. However to determine who the photographer is would be impossible. Erik Eslander (dead about 30 years) took a bunch of pictures like this. The United Nations sent around photographers every now and again who might have taken it. Wonder what their copyright policies are? They have not answered my emails, so, who knows? Could have been someone else with a camera, there that day. Anyway, I am in posession of the prints and figure to be as much the copyright holder as anyone, now. This picture is from the mid 1950s, taken in Ceylon, which might matter or might not. So . .... what do I do now? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 03:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Well I see that you have discovered the picture that Ron Jones and I were discussing, my mother's picture of Matt Gordon, File:Matt Gordon, Flying Tiger c. 1943.jpg. He had a crush on her in high school and sent her the picture. You might want to read Ron's analysis of the picture, unless you consider him to be soft on the subject. Carptrash (talk) 03:43, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Carptrash! Sorry to have to tag your pics. What you need to do is have a look at the Commons:Hirtle chart, which gives all the information on when stuff becomes public domain. You do not own the copyright to a photo simply because you have a copy of it in your possession; in all cases, the photographer is the copyrightholder, unless he has signed away his copyright to an employer or has released the material under license. So if you have in your possession a photograph like File:ER Kvaran Sri Lanka, mid 1950s.jpg where the identity of the photographer is unknown, and their date of death is unknown, and as far as we know the image has never been published before, the copyright does not expire until 120 years after creation of the image. For an anonymous picture taken in Sri Lanka in 1950, the copyright expires in 2070. For the Matt Gordon picture, the copyright expires in 2063. If you know the identity of the photographer and their date of death, the copyright expires 70 years after their date of death. There's a different set of rules for photos that have previously been published (in a book, magazine, online, or as a postcard, for example) and those that have not. It's up to the uploader to prove previous publication. There's special rules for India, Canada, the Ottoman Empire, and Poland. That's just the tip of the iceberg. I know that I know lots but I also know that there's lots that I don't know! I feel like quoting Donald Rumsfeld -- Dianna (talk) 03:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Published on line? If I publish them on line that I can use them? And please do not quote Donald Rumsfeld. I have worked hard forgetting him, don't need him back in my vibration. Thanks for your input, it is probably time I took a wikibreak. Carptrash (talk) 04:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Photograph of Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Raja (elephant)

• Photograph of My father & Hon. J.R Jayawardene with Raja (elephant)

Photograph of my father Nissanka Wijeyeratne & J.R Jayawardene with Raja (elephant) photograph is solely owned by me

Kind Regards,

Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 04:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Please look at the Commons:Hirtle chart, which gives all the information on when photographs becomes public domain. You do not own the copyright to a photo simply because you have a copy of it in your possession; in all cases, the photographer is the copyright holder, unless he has signed away his copyright to an employer or has released the material under license. A photograph where the identity of the photographer is unknown, and their date of death is unknown, and as far as we know the image has never been published before, the copyright does not expire until 120 years after creation of the image. Please stop uploading these images. Thank you. -- Dianna (talk) 05:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Photograph of Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Raja (elephant)

Photographer is my brother Neranjan Wijeyeratne

Kind Regards,

Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 05:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 05:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Bob Hope's leading ladies

Diannaa, I think it weakens the point about the astonishing array of leading ladies sashaying through Hope's movie career (many people today think of Hope as mainly a television performer but his best work, as he always pointed out himself, was in his movies) but I see where you're coming from regarding the guidelines you cited, which I never bother to glance at myself except under duress. In any case, hope you're having a great morning and thanks for the vigilant input, Diannaa. I'm always receptive to an alternate take on something. EnjoyForward (talk) 05:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Good morning EnjoyForward. I did not agree with everything this particular reviewer said and did, but in this particular instance I think she was right. The article was too list-y. And the truth be known, these actresses were pretty famous back in the day, but they're not so well known any more. Even Adolf Hitler needs to be identified in a photograph, see Diff of Adolf Hitler -- Dianna (talk) 15:46, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Photograph of Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Raja (elephant)

I am waiting to get your advice to upload the above photograph. The photographer had given the ownership to me.

Waiting to hear from you please

Warm regards,

Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 06:46, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Photograph of Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Raja (elephant)

• Reminder

I am waiting to get your advice to upload the above photograph. The photographer had given the ownership to me.

Waiting to hear from you please

Warm regards,

Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 13:29, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne. What you need to do is get the copyright holder of the photograph to send an email to the OTRS team using the instructions at Commons:OTRS. They will place an OTRS ticket on the file showing that the copyright holder has given permission to display the file here. Regards, -- Dianna (talk) 15:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC) Sorry to be so long in replying; I live in Canada and had to go to bed. -- Dianna (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

I would greatly appropriate it. Thank you very much.

With warm regards,

Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 04:28, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Images Marked

Re the images you marked - file:Bloukrans Bridge Bungy - Bungy Jumper.jpg and file:Olav Zipser Space Games photo.jpg

I have re-uploaded these and other images to my WikiCommons accnt - commons:User:Quadtripplea - and have requested appropriate consent emails pertaining to each image be sent directly to permissions-en@wikipedia.org

The 2 files you marked which I uploaded to Wikipedia can be deleted. Wikipedia seemed to want them uploaded to Wikicommons in anycase! Which I have now done, and will relink the images to the main articles once approval is granted (I assume automated but will check periodically!).

I also note that some logos I uploaded to Wikipedia, namely FaceAdrenalin-Logo, Olav Zipser's First School of Modern SkyFlying Logo, and Olav Zipser Official FreeFly Astronaut Project Space Patch, have been marked as needing to be smaller and for some other stuff. I have also uploaded these and others to WikiCommons User:Quadtripplea as well as requested appropriate consent emails be sent direct to permissions-en@wikipedia.org for all of these.

Perhaps you can check some of my latest image uploads to Wikicommons and give it all an overview and let me know if there is anything I need to give any more attention to at this time. I am hoping to have this image uploading and referencing thing waxed and YES I have read hundreds and thousands of words from the various articles in an attempt to understand everything!

Thanks in advance for the assistance and guidance Quadtripplea (talk) 19:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Quadtripplea. If there's an email on the way, you need to add the {{OTRS pending}} template to the files. That way, no one will delete/nominate for deletion the files for a while, and it makes it easier for the OTRS team to match up images with emails. I have done that for the two files on the Commons that you mention above.

I was looking over your other uploads to the Commons, and there's some problems. First, I'd like to say that only files to which you personally own the copyright should be uploaded to the Commons, plus those images with OTRS permssion tickets in place, and those with OTRS pending. Corporate logos should not be on the Commons unless they have an OTRS ticket attached. Non-free logos need to be uploaded here to en.wiki and marked for fair use. Several of these logos are already here and are marked for fair use, and thus should not be on the Commons. These I will nominate for deletion from the Commons:

• File:Face Adrenalin Logo.tiff
• File:Olav Zipser's First School of Modern SkyFlying Logo.jpg
• File:Olav Zipser Official FreeFly Astronaut Project Space Patch.jpg

There's several non-free logos that you uploaded that are present on the Commons that should not be there; they should be here on en.wiki and marked for fair use. These I will nominate for deletion on the Commons, but will make a local copy for fair use:

• File:Harties Aerial Cableway Logo 2013.jpg
• File:Bush Babies Monkey Sanctuary Logo.JPG
• File:Elephant Sanctuary Hartbeespoort Dam Logo 2013.jpg

There's also several photographs on the Commons with inadequate evidence of permission of the original photographer. These I will mark for deletion, and you will have a week to contact the copyright holders to get emails sent to get the required OTRS tickets in place:

• File:Olav Zipser with InterOrbital Systems Rocket.jpg
• File:Olav Zipser FreeFlying with his Sports Emmy Award.jpg
• File:Olav Zipser FreeFly Astronaut Spacesuit Testing.jpg
• File:TheRanchResortPoolandLapaMay2010.JPG
• File:TheRanchResortWalkWithLionApril2010.JPG

Sorry that this stuff is all so fiendishly difficult and complicated. Simple summary: If you did not personally take the photo, please arrange for an email from the copyright holder to be sent to the OTRS team. Files of this type can be uploaded to the Commons; please mark them with an {{OTRS pending}} template. Corporate logos should be uploaded here, and marked for fair use. An example where this has been properly done is File:FaceAdrenalin-Logo.tiff. This logo is too large to meet our fair-use guidelines, so I have marked it for size reduction as well. -- Dianna (talk) 20:03, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I just spent 15 hours in front of a computer with multiple browsers open reading everything I could and trying to do everything right. I requested the emails for consent be sent direct, which I spent hours deciphering, these are also probably wrong and will have wasted my time and the owners of the logos and images time, which will all have to be repeated... I am very unclear even having read your message several times - these here those there, those too large, those not these, those if that with them and this over there but not if... now these ones over there are marked for deletion, and those over here should be up there. So whatever! Im over images. The ones that are there can just fall away. Over it for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quadtripplea (talk • contribs) 20:36, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Im confused. Cant you fix things up? Im also not clear on what I should and shouldnt bother working on with what you are deleting anyway Quadtripplea (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I am indeed fixing everything up that is in my power to fix. I have just spent the last hour and a half on it. All the logos are now here on en.wiki, except for the one for the Ranch Resort, which has already got an OTRS permission ticket in place. Don't worry about the size reductions; we have people who specialise in that. What you need to do, if you have not already done so, is to contact the copyright holders of the photographs and get emails sent giving permission to display the images here. For each image that has an email on the way, add an {{OTRS pending}} template. That will keep the files from being deleted for quite some time as they will be in the OTRS queue. And if they are deleted and an email is received at a later date, they can be undeleted. -- Dianna (talk) 20:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Decorah Eagles images

Hi, thank you for alerting me about my screen-shots, but I don't see what is needed from me. After reading the link you suggested, it seems I've done all that is needed by providing the URL to Ustream, from which the screen-shots came. Please leave me simple instructions so I can help further. [Simple being the operative word (it's one of those days... or months)]. Much appreciated, petrarchan47tc 01:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Petrarchan47. I'm just not seeing anywhere on that webpage where the material is released under license or is in the public domain and is thus available to display here. Am I missing something? -- Dianna (talk) 01:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm probably the one missing something. I've never uploaded images before these, they are screen-shots that I took from my own computer while watching the eagles on their Usteam channel. Does that make me the owner, and what do I need to do to make these images available to display? petrarchan47tc 01:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

In other words, to my knowledge I own these images. If that is the case, what exactly do I need to do to make these free for anyone to use? The tag says that I had chosen to copyright these images. I did not mean to do that. Thanks for your patience. petrarchan47tc 01:49, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I have been digging around and it looks like their site policy says that the copyright would have to be specifically released by the stream originator. I don't know how to find the specific stream from which you captured the images. Looking at some of the other streams, I am unable to figure out how to determine if the material is copyright or if it has been released under license. Here is a link to their site-wide copyright policy. -- Dianna (talk) 01:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. This is the Ustream channel in question. I could get approval from Raptor Resource Project, if that's what is needed. petrarchan47tc 03:10, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

That would be best, as there does not seem to be a release or license on that page (other than the routine copyright notice). What you need to do is to ask them to send an email directly to the OTRS team telling them that it is okay to display images from the feed on this website. There's instructions at Commons:OTRS. Once you know their email is on the way, please add an {{OTRS pending}} template to each image for which they've given approval. Make sure you include all the images that you uploaded from the feed, not just the four that I tagged for deletion. Once the email is on the way to the OTRS team, please let me know, and I will remove the deletion nomination templates. So sorry for the extra work, but Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Thanks -- Dianna (talk) 03:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for making it so clear. petrarchan47tc 03:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Does this relieve me of the need for an email? petrarchan47tc 03:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

From what I understand, RRProject has given free license to use of their Ustreams if their website is linked as the source. So I've changed the source from UStream to RRP on all applicable images. Please let me know if I've more to do. petrarchan47tc 05:01, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

This is exactly what we were looking for, but you will still have to get an email, as the "Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported" license is not compatible with the files being hosted here, as it only allows for non-commercial use. That means an email giving permission will still be required. Sorry for the extra trouble. -- Dianna (talk) 15:33, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Why would we need anything other than non-commercial use, Wikipedia isn't selling anything? So sorry to trouble you with these questions... petrarchan47tc 01:01, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry, it's a perfectly reasonable question. It's because there's a Wikipedia policy that the content, excluding that which is specifically labelled as "non-free" or "fair use", has to be freely copyable by anyone for any purpose. Therefore the copyright holder has to release the material to us under a compatible license. The "Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported" license is not a compatible license, because it prohibits commercial use. WP:COPYOTHERS gives information on this point. -- Dianna (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Just delete them. petrarchan47tc 01:14, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Why not try to get the OTRS ticket? You coud send them an email and ask. :/ -- Dianna (talk) 01:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

The photos really do make the article, since the subject is visual, but I don't have the time to figure out OTRS. It might seem simple to you, but seriously that is one complicated instruction page. Are there any volunteers who know how this process works who try to help save images? petrarchan47tc 01:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Simple instructions:

• Contact the copyrightholder by email and tell them you wish to display the images on Wikipedia. Give them the urls for what you've got uploaded.
• Ask them if it's okay to display the images, and if so, suggest that they release the material under a Attribution 3.0 Unported (cc by 3.0) or other similar license.
• If they agree, they need to send an email directly to the OTRS team at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org from an email address that demonstrates that they are who they say they are. They need to list in the email address the url of each image that they agree to display and which license they have chosen.
• For each image they agree to display, you put an {{OTRS pending}} template on the file.
• Let me know once this happens, and I will remove the deletion templates. If it happens after the tagged files are deleted, the OTRS volunteer who handles the request will undelete the files. -- Dianna (talk) 05:40, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

You are most kind. I'll be in touch. Thank you! petrarchan47tc 08:35, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Dianna, you saved the pictures! Hopefully all will work out now, the have sent the requested email. Thank you for your patience with me :) petrarchan47tc 23:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Yay! But it was you who saved them, imo. I have removed the deletion template from the four that I had nominated. There's no rush for the next step; in fact the OTRS team is quite backlogged, so don't be surprised if the images are not handled right away. Best wishes, -- Dianna (talk) 23:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Bless you ~ a true gift to Wikipedia, imo. petrarchan47tc 00:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

So kind of you to say. Timely too, as I was feeling a little down today. -- Dianna (talk) 00:12, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh dear. Well, luckily that's what these were made for! petrarchan47tc 00:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for the automated task

Hello Dianna.

How are you?

Although you are doing your daily admin tasks properly, but below is my humble request.

If you think i have irked you with my requests before then my sincere apologies for those.

Hereby i am requesting you for the deletion of non-used revisions for the below file :

Seethamma vakitlo sirimalle chettu film poster

Have a happy (day and editing).

Raghusri (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Dianna. Raghusri (talk) 10:50, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Slo-mo revert war

Would you please consider blocking this single-purpose account engaged in slo-mo revert war with everybody (experienced, long-term editors only)? There are no summaries. No reliable sources. No discussion. The user was already reported to ANI just recently, but I think, the case was closed prematurely.[3] User Kaskusia (talk · contribs) probably thinks, it's a game. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 15:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Poeticbent. I had already edited the article and thus am involved, and won't be issuing a block. However, I have restored the former lead to the article and I have put a message on the editor's talk page about COI, RS, and edit warring. I will watch-list -- Dianna (talk) 16:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Dianna. If there's no improvement though, the 3RR report would probably be needed. Poeticbent talk 16:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing up my edit. It looks like I thought some content had been removed, but it had only been moved. -- Dianna (talk) 18:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

You might also want to check out the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Krzyzowiec‎ for my newest report at the bottom. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 18:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Delete file history?

Hi Dianna. Can you delete the extra revisions of File:Daniel Stern.jpg that are not the original upload? Looks like someone got the author and the actor mixed up at one point. The correct image is the one that is shown twice, at top and bottom. I'm also pretty sure the middle image should not be included for licensing reasons. Thanks. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 21:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

All done. I don't think we have adequate permissions in place for the licenses that were on the file, so I have converted it to fair use. -- Dianna (talk) 21:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks. I stumbled upon that article circuitously, as I often do, and was sad to see he had died. I took a creative writing class from him back in 2001, and though I had a vague idea he was pretty important, I didn't realize what a fascinating and varied life he'd led. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 21:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

He sounds like a really interesting guy. -- Dianna (talk) 21:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I disambiguated the Article= template parameter to head off future confusion. --Lexein (talk) 23:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Dianna (talk) 23:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Torchiest was even smarter about it and DAB'd the file name. (chuckle). --Lexein (talk) 23:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Haha, no worries, between the three of us, we figured it out. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Plant's Strider SPI

• I've started an SPI here, perhaps you would consider weighing-in on the socking likelyhood. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:20, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
  • In my opinion, you should put up at least a few of the most egregious diffs. Not too many though; just your best examples. -- Dianna (talk) 01:23, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
    • I've now added some. Do you think that's enough, or should I add more? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
      • I think you could just start with those, and put up a few more if requested. Be patient; like everywhere else, they're facing backlogs. -- Dianna (talk) 01:27, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
        • It's already been declined. Will you please weigh-in there? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:29, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
          • Check-user has been declined, and now an admin will review the behavioural evidence. I am not going to comment, because I feel too biased. -- Dianna (talk) 01:31, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
            • I gotta go and rest for a while, but will probably be back on later. -- Dianna (talk) 01:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
              • I think you have a named user account in mind as to who you think it is. There may be behavioural evidence that links the old named account to the new named account. You need to tell the SPI admins who you think it is. Do so by email. Send it to User:DoRD. This is all a suggestion though it's worded like an order. I am just tired and unable to pretend to be Japanese at the moment -- Dianna (talk) 05:54, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
                • {{ygm}}. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 06:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Problem with user

This User talk:SanamTeriKasam has a habit of disturbing [images] unnecessarily.He dont even care about warnings and comments.---zeeyanketu ^{talk to me} 23:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

There's no rule against uploading new versions of posters that I am aware of. Correct me if I'm wrong? So there's no administrative action that can be taken at this time. -- Dianna (talk) 06:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

RevDel request

Hi Diannaa, don't know if you're still up, but Neil Young might need a revdel [4]. Thanks, The Interior (Talk) 06:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Got it. Good catch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=221mohEolWc -- Dianna (talk) 06:07, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. People always think that track is about his dad, but it's funny that it's actually about some crusty ol' caretaker. The Interior (Talk) 06:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Love lost, such a cost. Give me things that don't get lost. -- Dianna (talk) 15:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

At it again from a different IP. [5]. Boo. This person needs to either burn out or fade away. The Interior (Talk) 21:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Probably home & school. I have laid a schoolblock on the 205 for a couple days and semi'd the article for a week. Thanks for your alertness. -- Dianna (talk) 21:38, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Keep on rockin' in the free world, D. The Interior (Talk) 22:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello

So you presented me with a list of some of my rather subjective comments. As you stated, it is not an exhaustive list. However, let's try and avoid a double standard and check fellow WP editor Cynwolfe's comments to me. Cynwolfe initiated this whole thing by stating I am showing my ignorance...To a general observation of the nature of discussion which reminded me (for those who are old enough, like me) of the 1960s. I don't particularly like being called "ignorant" either. I thing you should investigate word-for-word Cynwolfe's comments as well. I think she is overreacting...She even made a comment to me that her typo was "not sinister"...Don't you think that type of a reaction is hypersensitive (?) I did ask Cynwolfe to relax and keep the harmony. I have eased up considerably, and yet you are giving me a warning. Another editor (who did apologize to me) stated to me that I will be blocked so fast that my head will spin...I didn't like that either. Before you start lecturing me, I couldn't care if you are the founder WP, please review both sides and don't cop to a double standard. If I am blocked do you think that really scares me ? LOL I don't like threats...Not from you or anyone. I am also not particularly pleased with some of your tone, either. Do what you will, but before doing so, be fair and just in your assessment. And don't cop to a double standard because another WP editor is getting almost hysterical. Now this other WP editor (dougweller) explained to me an error in my deletion without being condescending (like Cynwolfe has a few times), but did so in a courteous, mature manner and I had no problem with it. Once again, please look at both sides of the issue before you or anyone else takes further action. There have been some rather colourful characters among WP editors who have used some colourful language, and they are still WP editors and not blocked. Cynwolfe has not responded to me entirely properly, either. When I sincerely made an effort at reconciliation on her talk page (after she notified me of her complaint), her response was that she wanted no further interaction with me. However, she continued to interact with me on Marc Antony Talk Page after this seemingly implacable response to my gesture of reconciliation. You can view this in her Talk Page (unless it was maybe deleted). Again, I do enjoy editing on WP, but it seems like with every human social environment, where the possibility of egos and attitudes exist, there will be degrees of disagreement. I will no longer directly respond to Cynwolfe, but will offer a third person type analysis. Do what you will. Flagrantedelicto (talk) 06:08, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Userfy req.

Could you userfy Easter Egg Archive under User:Lexein/EEA, including Talk page and history? The original deleting admin is no longer an admin. I plan to flesh out the article: site is regularly cited by RS, has been published in book form, and has been discussed in RS. I'm aware that the histories may be missing size info due to a bug from that era. Thanks. --Lexein (talk) 12:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done -- Dianna (talk) 17:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but the article history only has your userfy event - was there no more to the history? --Lexein (talk) 16:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

There were only four deleted edits (all from 2007), and there was nothing that's significantly different from the material I put on your subpage, just spelling corrections and stuff like that. -- Dianna (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Cite Encyclopedia instead of NewGrove2001

Hi Diannaa. Because I'm no longer happy with the control that {{NewGrove2001}} gives over its parameters, I edited an article to replace its use with {{cite encyclopedia}}. There are a number of problems with the NewGrove2001 template, with the inability to use |ref=harv being the greatest. Could you please cast an eye over my edit, especially in relation to the following issues:

• I would like to replace all the instances of {{NewGrove2001}} that I've used in various articles with {{cite encyclopedia}}, so I want to make sure that I've got the parameters right. If we can get them right, I would like to promote the use of cite encyclopedia in this context on various talk pages, so the syntax should be as good as possible to avoid unnecessary debate.
• I'm not comfortable with how my edit rendered "In Stanley Sadie". Sadie is the overall editor of the encyclopaedia, so the rendering doesn't seem quite right. Did I make a mistake?
• New Grove has many volumes, and in my edit example, I put the volume (number 10) in the cite syntax. I guess that there is a reasonable chance that in music-related articles, many volumes might be quoted (e.g. if Hicks wrote articles in other volumes), in which case "Hicks|2001" would not be unique for correct sfn function. Is the best strategy to do what I've done, but to be prepared to use {{sfnRef}} if ambiguity arises; or would you do something like incorporate the volume information into the |loc parameter of sfn (e.g. {{sfn|Hicks|2001|loc=volume 10, page=770}})?
• I'm not sure about the |lccn parameter. The best number I can find for that in the printed work is 00-0055156, however I'm worried about that for two reasons: I was expecting "01-" (based on the year 2001), and the number after the dash is seven digits long (instead of the expected six).
• Are there any other parameters in cite encyclopedia that I should attempt to complete?
• Instead of the above, is there any merit in trying to extend the NewGrove2001 template to incorporate other parameters (at the very least |ref=harv)?

As always, thank you for your knowledgeable and tireless assistance in these matters. GFHandel ♬  21:27, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi GFHandel! My opinion is that the NewGrove2001 template has outlived its usefulness. It's inflexible, and we did not have access to the sfn system when it was created. It's also not going to produce citations that are readily accessible to bots. As far as filling out the cite encyclopedia template, my opinion is that you should use the volume and page parameters in all instances, and for the same reason: the material is then accessible to automated tools. Then resolve any that have the same author & year using the sfnRef template. What parameters to complete? Fill out everything you have, and then run Citation Bot, and see if it can fill in anything further. I examined the cite encyclopedia template, and it supports the | editor-last = and | editor-first = parameters, which gives a different layout, one which is correct according to Chicago. I will add these parameters to the table in the template documentation.

Regarding the LCCN number, it looks like they changed their numbering system from 2001 forward, but 00-0055156 does not fit the new structure or the old structure, so this is obviously not an LCCN number. -- Dianna (talk) 22:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your usual prompt attention to requests. Are you saying that you would put the volume and page information in the cite encyclopedia template, as well as putting at least the page number in the sfn template? Instead of explaining here, perhaps you could edit the article to demonstrate what you mean by "use the volume and page parameters in all instances"? Does the "In Stanley Sadie" rendering make sense to you (because I find it weird)? I ran the Citation Bot, but didn't notice anything change in the article (but I guess that could be different if I manage to fill extra parameters later). There's only 79 transclusions of NewGrove2001 (a lot of which I added), so if I get this right, I think I'll go through the articles and replace its use. Should anything get updated in your User:Diannaa/Citation templates guide based on this example? GFHandel ♬  23:45, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

It's possible to list page numbers in both the cite encyclopedia and sfn templates. Suppose the article you are citing is ten pages long, covering pages 310 to 320 in the encyclopedia. You would put that information in the cite encyclopedia template. But if the information you actually used in your article was on page 317, you would put that information in the sfn template. If the article does not span multiple pages, it would be best to just show the page number in the sfn template alone. "Stanley Sadie" looked weird to me too, but it's not displaying that way any more. I will think about the remainder of your remarks, I am trying to fix a table and will get back to you if I have any more comments. -- Dianna (talk) 00:02, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Someone is acting up at the Sylvia Young Theatre School

There's a serial pest at the Sylvia Young Theatre School article. Fairly regularly, an editor (usually anonymously) comes along and tries to get his name inserted into the article. It is always explained (via edit comments) why that isn't appropriate, however more care was taken the one time the editor edited under an account (which John ended up blocking). The article receives very few genuine edits per year, so would it be appropriate to apply a fairly lengthy PC protection to the page? If you do, I will undertake to monitor and quickly act on any PC requests that are generated. Thanks for any help you can give there. Cheers. GFHandel ♬  23:45, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I think semi-protection will work better, and be less burdensome for page-watchers, as presently there's virtually no edits that are being kept. We can start with two weeks. I will watch-list and re-evaluate once the page protection wears off and decide what to do next. -- Dianna (talk) 00:28, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

File:WTLR Radio Station Shooting.jpg

I noticed you added a {{Non-free reduce}} template to the File:WTLR Radio Station Shooting.jpg image. Unfortunately, this was the only image available at the time (I am the uploader) and there wasn't a smaller version available. At present, the image is used on the WTLR page at 150px, so it is not used at it's full 512x305 pixel size. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Neutralhomer. You don't have to worry about reducing it yourself.There's people who specialise in image reduction, and they do very nice work. There was recently a big batch done by User:DASHBot and they turned out really nice as well. -- Dianna (talk) 03:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Neat! Out of force-of-habit, I always reduce all my images down to either 150px or 200px, especially in the infoboxes. It's something I have done since 2006 when I started here and everyone had to reduce the big images. :) So, it became a force-of-habit. Neat that we have a bot for that now. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

It does really nice work, too, leaving us free for other tasks that only people can do. But watch out !!! -- Dianna (talk) 04:17, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

A request

Hey Diannaa. Sturmvogel 66 recommended me to ask you to give this article: Santa María de la Cabeza castle a copyedit. It is not very long, so I guess copyediting it won't take too long. I'd really appreciate all the help :) Thank you! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 13:59, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey. I have answered your two queries in the GA page. Thanks! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 21:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

NFCC question - The Dig audiobook

Can you see if there is any more history for File:TheDig-AudioBookNovel-AlanDeanFoster.jpg? I think it fails NFCC #8, and I raised the issue on the article's talkpage, but I wanted to see if there was any information on the original uploader, not the bot that uploaded the most recent version. I'm debating over whether its inclusion is just pure trivia, and thought maybe the original uploader would have a justification for keeping it. Thanks. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Never mind, another editor agreed with removal, so I've pulled it from the article. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tears Of The Enchanted Mainframe - Album Cover.jpg

Hi Diannaa. The image file File:Tears Of The Enchanted Mainframe - Album Cover.jpg is indeed under the GNU Free Documentation License. Any idea why you flagged it otherwise? Let me know if there is anything else I need to do on my end as I am the creator and sole owner. Thanks. Cadillacula (talk) 00:48, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Virtually all album covers are copyright material is why I tagged. But since you assert this is material you created yourself that you wish to release under license, I will take your word for it and remove the deletion nomination. It might be best if you send an email to the OTRS team letting them know you are the creator, following the instructions at Commons:OTRS, so other patrolling admins don't make the same mistake. -- Dianna (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

An email containing details of the permission for this file has been sent in accordance with WP:OTRS. Thanks. Cadillacula (talk) 03:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Sorry for the extra trouble. -- Dianna (talk) 04:00, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

tb

Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 January 29.
Message added 02:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CCI push

Hey. I'm sending you this since you helped out during the initial rush at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Ktr101. It's now down to the final 200 articles, less then that technically, and if we were to all do a few a day we could probably wrap this one up in a week. Hopefully you'll be able to help out again. Wizardman 04:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, cool. I will pop over tomorrow and help out. -- Dianna (talk) 04:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Issue with Category at Jhené Aiko

Hi Dianna. If you have a moment, could you please look at the very recent history of the Jhené Aiko article? A user (whose talk page shows all sorts of problems with Category usage) is adding "Category:Jews in the African diaspora" to the article when it is quite clear that the article text is not supporting her identifying herself as Jewish (just that she identifies with her ethnic heritage – which is probably not supported by the sources anyway). I've reverted a couple of times (with reasons), however I'm not willing to revert again (especially since the editor's edit comments show a shifting rationale). I'm also not comfortable with another category just added: "Category:Yaqui people" (for the reason given in my revert edit comment). Thanks in advance for any help you can provide, however if your page is not the appropriate venue for this, where would you recommend I raise the issue for a wider discussion? Cheers. GFHandel ♬  06:24, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

There's no discussion happening on the talk page, so I am going to respond over there instead of here, to try to get the ball rolling. I think the reliable sources noticeboard or the BLP would be good places to ask if we can't sort it out. -- Dianna (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Windows Chicago (build 58) boot screen.jpg

Hi.

Something weird just happened: I tried to revert this edit of yours and suddenly Twinkle took over and reverted it as vandalism! Can't think why it happened. Sorry. I had to fix it with another edit.

Anyway, I wanted to let you know that {{Microsoft screenshot}} has a host of requirements which File:Windows Chicago (build 58) boot screen.jpg does not fulfill.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 11:07, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Again, I apologize for the revert goof. I can't apologize enough. Codename Lisa (talk) 11:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I added this to a few yesterday, so I will check them over later and revert if they were misplaced. -- Dianna (talk) 15:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I just visited your contribution log and made adjustments. Hopefully, everything is fine. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Codename Lisa! I am always grateful to get help from more knowledgeable users. -- Dianna (talk) 19:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Possibly unfree File:Weirauch Family, namesake of Wirock, MN.jpg

The photo referenced was found in an archive and scanned. It is also on the Mn Historical Society's site where it is listed as belonging to Murray County Historical Society. The link is included on the Wikipedia page where it is used. It was taken in 1910, and I'm pretty sure it is safely in the public domain.

Ray Lowry Ray Lowry 16:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mr Lowry. I am going to copy your remark over to the Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 January 29#File:Weirauch Family, namesake of Wirock, MN.jpg, where the closing admin will see it. -- Dianna (talk) 19:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hitler vegetarian

Hello Diannaa, Can I ask you a question? In the main article about Hitler, it says "Hitler followed a vegetarian diet", with a link to the page Adolf Hitler's vegetarianism. But if you actually bother to go to that page, it says there that "Adolf Hitler has been regarded by some historians as a vegetarian". As I said, Hitler's biographers Albert Speer, Robert Payne, John Toland, and others, show (think) that he was not vegetarian, but EVEN IF he was, why should the main article pretend that there is consensus in this matter? Of course I am NOT going to start an edit war over such a silly question, but I should like to know why you have decided to delete (hide), in the main article, that only some historians think Hitler was a vegetarian (even if he indeed was one). Thanks very much. ~ Daniel Tomé (talk) 01:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article Vegetarianism of Adolf Hitler is of a much poorer quality than the main Adolf Hitler article. None of the major historians that you mention were even used as sources for its preparation, whereas they were for the main article, which is currently at Good Article status. I have personally checked the sourcing and accuracy of all the material in the main article, as I am the person who brought it to GA. I have read Speer and Toland and Kershaw and Bullock and have most of these books here in my home or readily available at the library where I work. So I can say with confidence that all these major historians do indeed say that Hitler was a vegetarian. -- Dianna (talk) 01:49, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. It is interesting that you should say that the article specific to that theme is wrong, but you are right. That could be true. But you want to pretend there is consensus in this matter (because you read some books, cool) when there isn't. Why do you ignore the names that I cited above? Sorry to say, but you come across as very biased (which is fine, but imposing your bias in the main article is not). Who are you to say that the other historians are wrong? Wikipedia should be neutral, and not just state your opinion. Robert Payne (Hitler's biographer) claims that Hitler was not a vegetarian.

Also, please see [6]: "The Fuehrer's close associate, Albert Speer, has written that his leader had a weakness for meat-filled ravioli and sausages from butcher shops in Munich."

John Toland attests to the same. I am not saying that Hitler was not a vegetarian. I am saying that it is very CLEAR that there is no consensus in this matter. Your decision to pretend that there is such a consensus is biased. ~ Daniel Tomé (talk) 02:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Any comments on this matter should be posted at the Adolf Hitler talk page please, so other interested editors can participate. Thanks. -- Dianna (talk) 02:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, excellent reply, as expected. I don't honestly understand why it should be me to take this issue to the Talk page, when it is you who is pretending that there is consensus among historians (when there isn't). I would just like to make a FINAL comment, if you don't mind, because in my last reply I forgot to make a reference to Dione Lucas (Hitler's personal cook during the late 1930s), who as you know, wrote "I do not mean to spoil your appetite for stuffed squab, but you might be interested to know that it was a great favourite with Hitler, who dined at the hotel often." ("squab", i.e. pigeon). Not that I expect that to do much for you. I just note, finally, that the way you behave(d) (in this issue) is very unbecoming to an administrator in Wikipedia, in my opinion. Kind regards. ~ Daniel Tomé (talk) 02:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Non-free reduce tag at File:Flyer News Issue 21.jpg

Recently, you placed a non-free reduce tag at File:Flyer News Issue 21.jpg. While I understand you likely did not build this template, I find it to be somewhat less than helpful. It suggests reducing the file size, but does not offer a guideline as to what a permissible size would be. The file at that page is 477 by 574, certainly not what I would consider to be high resolution. The image, which is of a newspaper page, has been reproduced at a size small enough to make the body text of the page illegible, which seems to me to satisfy the non-free content policy as I am reading it. I would appreciate your thoughts. Thanks. Newsboy85 (talk) 09:27, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Newsboy85! The current standard is discussed at WP:Image resolution. In a nutshell, the guideline calls for a pic to be no more than 0.1 megapixels. For a rough guide as to whether or not an image falls within the guideline, I multiply the two dimensions, and if the result is over 100,000, it's too big. This image, at 477 x 574, gives a result of 273,798, which is more than double the recommended size. There's people who specialise in doing image reductions and even a bot (User:DASHBot) that recently did a big batch with excellent results, with the images essentially looking no different, but meeting the guideline. -- Dianna (talk) 15:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Found a new source for list of best selling video games

I have found another source Statisticbrain.com which have the list for bets selling PS3 games and Xbox 360 games. Here are the links (http://www.statisticbrain.com/playstation-3-best-selling-game-statistics/) and (http://www.statisticbrain.com/xbox-360-best-selling-games-statistics/). Before editing the article again I want to verify with other editors and the adminstrators that if it is a good and valid source. Also It stats that COD: MW3 is the best selling game for PS3 and best selling non-bundled game for 360. Also one more thing don't get confused between the us and global sales ection because the global sales includes us sales too. Thank you. KahnJohn27 (talk) 10:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I like the look of the site, and feel it's probably okay, but video games are not my specialty. You might think about posting at the Reliable Sources noticeboard for wider input. -- Dianna (talk) 19:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Evening Standard headline

Hi Diannaa, just to let you know that I've removed your request for a reduced version of this. [7] This is already a reduced version. It's an historically important front page in the events following the death of Ian Tomlinson. The newspaper was misled by police sources, according to subsequent reports. It's a long story, but this front page became an integral part of how events unfolded politically in London on that day and the days that followed, and it's important that the headline and subheads be clearly legible. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 16:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi SlimVirgin! I wasn't sure about tagging this one, but since the results lately from the people (and the bot User:DASHBot) who have been doing the reductions have been excellent, I thought I would let them take a look. But I will defer to your judgement. -- Dianna (talk) 19:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:39, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Copy edits

Hey Dianna. I'm trying to be a nitpicky meanie today and find mistakes in everyone's copy edits for the drive. And so it came to pass that I corrected a dangling modifier you left behind at Princess Nukata. Of course your edits are otherwise solid as always. Cheers. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 20:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh wow. I say things like that all the time, and now you're telling me it's wrong? he he. Thanks, Torchiest. -- Dianna (talk) 20:06, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Trieste Flag

Thanks for the update! Much appreciated. Could you possibly do the same introucing the the correct coat of arms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Trieste-Trst-Triest_coat_of_arms.svg replacing automatically the old wrong one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Free_Territory_of_Trieste_coat_of_arms.svg I wouldn't know how to do it, so thanks in advance for the support :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarska (talk • contribs) 08:47, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done -- Dianna (talk) 19:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)