User talk:Donald Schäfer

MateriaMedicaDeVillanueva1546.jpg

Hi. An image can not be both public domain and restricted from commercial use - public domain means completely unrestricted. But anyway, Wikipedia cannot accept material that is restricted from commercial use - it must be usable at least as freely as described by a CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported License, which means it cannot be restricted from commercial use -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

if wikipedia cannot accept images that are restricted to non commertial use why does it give that option for uploading files? Anyway, is there any problem in me contacting Gonzalez Echeverria in order to get his authoritation for using it just under wikipedia?--Donald Schäfer (talk) 20:16, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

That's a good question, but if you look at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials#Donating your photographs, it says "Note that any restrictions cannot include terms from unacceptable licenses, such as "no derivative works" or "no commercial use."". And the fact remains that the status was specified incorrectly - if it is restricted, then it is not public domain as you claimed. And no, I'm afraid Wikipedia cannot accept material released for use only on Wikipedia - Wikipedia content is licensed under a CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported License, and can be taken and used by third parties in accordance with that - which means that donated material must be similarly freely licensed -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:26, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok then I guess that if I go to the archives and take the picture myself, then I am the author. And I can releash it to public domain. For the book itself is of free access. I can do it in a week, I had to go anyway. Thats fine, isn't it? At least it works like that for my books.--Donald Schäfer (talk) 20:33, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, as far as I know that should be fine - and thanks in advance for doing it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:58, 26 November 2011 (UTC).

That would be great , Mr Schäfel. Thanks for reacting to my contribution. Lets try to create a great article. Though I am an expert in XVI century, not in XVII, if I have time I will do my best.--Anatoly Ilych Belousov (talk) 21:43, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I will get that photo. And I will contribute more, dont worry.--Donald Schäfer (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

"Identity of Servetus"

Ok, yes we also have in our College of Delaware and Ankara, those proofs about Servetus new identity and we also included it in our modern history majors. In History of Medicine, Theology, and French Studies.--Alice Alaster (talk) 12:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy on personal attacks

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

WP:NPA --Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks do not help make a point; they only hurt the Wikipedia community and deter users from helping to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about other contributors may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to blocks. Now you are warned. --Jdemarcos (talk) 10:45, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Michael Servetus Archive

I have removed your comment concerning the archive on this page as it violated policy, specifically including WP:NPA. Archiving a talk page (as I noted on the linked page) is standard practice. Personal attacks are never acceptable on Wikipedia, and will lead to blocks. Note that this issue has been through COI/N and is considered resolved. --Nouniquenames (talk) 04:31, 6 September 2012 (UTC)