User talk:ESkog/Archive13

Index of Talk Page archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1A 1B 1C 1D 1E 1F May 19-December 22, 2010 - December 23, 2010 - November 10, 2011 - December 8, 2011 - October 8, 2012 - October 18, 2012 - May 27, 2013 - May 30, 2013 - March 26, 2014 - January 29, 2015 - March 15, 2017

A Link to the Past's unblock request

Hello.
I just noticed that your unblock decline reason was, "I'm also not convinced you really understand what 'clear and obvious vandalism' is."
He put up another unblock template in hope that it would catch your attention, but I figured it'd be easier to simply add it here: "If I do revert anything (besides clear vandalism, such as adding expletives to articles), then I get blocked for a week." (Yes, I know, obvious question: why didn't he remember to put that in the unblock request?)
Anyways, just putting it here for the sake of having all information. (What you choose to do with it is your business, not mine) Bladestorm 19:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Cleveland Browns and New England Patriots seasons

Please explain your edits to various Cleveland Browns and New England Patriots season pages. The logo you removed from the Patriots' season page was Image:Pats 1971-1992 logo.PNG, which does indeed have a fair use rationale. Pats1 03:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's no standard way to provide a rationale for every use. The rationale is contained within the file itself, and would conceivably apply to every use that falls within the guidelines prescribed. The logos are not merely decorating the season articles; the logo is being used to identify the team's season being analyzed. Pats1 03:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The image's page itself. Would you want the rationale provided somehow on each article it is being used? Or do you want the image's page to have rationale listed for each article it's being used in? Pats1 03:40, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please also see 1990 New York Giants season, which passed GA, logo and all. Pats1 03:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been around Wikipedia for awhile, and I've yet to see an image with rationale listed for every use. Can you please show me one? This includes every NFL helmet and logo. Pats1 03:45, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, do you want me to just copy the same rationale that's already there and add 40-something article titles to it? That's just being difficult. You have yet to show me an image page with rationales listed for each article use. Pats1 04:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per what? This obviously isn't common opinion, as shown by 1990 New York Giants season passing GA. Again, it's not decorative. The logos, especially the older ones which aren't contained in the main team articles, identify the team (season) in question. Pats1 04:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've yet to see an example. I will be reverting your edits if I do not see some precedent set. Pats1 14:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also find it interesting that you've bypassed the uniforms on the season pages without any problems. They're just for decoration, right? No? That's right; they're part of the team's identity for the given year. Pats1 14:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't my point. Instead of being the fair use police, removing the logos from hundreds of pages, and then running, why don't you help add the rationales and then revert all of your edits? Pats1 17:54, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your opinion. Why don't you discuss some of this at WP:NFL instead of making more than 100 AWB edits and leaving the dirty work to someone else? And why the first person? Stop acting like you "are" Wikipedia. Pats1 18:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Brown FAC

I've removed the fair use images and I hope you'll re-review the FA candidacy of the article. CLA 03:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale

Hi, a short time ago you tagged an image I uploaded stating that it didn't have a fair use rationale other than using one of the big plate templates. I only recently discovered that a detailed rationale was required so I've starting adding detailed rationales to the images I've uploaded - but I was wondering, could you do me a favour and check one of the images that I've added to (such as this one) to make sure I'm leaving an adequate rationale? I'd really appreciate it. EvilRedEye 11:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

I only reverted those couple I did after I had added a fair use rationale to the images. I just used rollback since it was quicker than adding it back in. Wizardman 15:02, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NFL images

This problem looks bigger than I thought; look over on Image:NYJ 3567.gif where users claim that these uniform designs are things they could release into the public domain. I'm also about to be bold and remove the logo parameter from the NFL season template so it will be discouraged. — Moe ε 22:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I already taken care of some of them Images. Like the one abvoe, I retagged as a {{sports uniform}} and tagged as no rationale. — Moe ε 22:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of violations just went bye-bye — Moe ε 23:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have finished removing the image parameter all together from the template transclusions. — Moe ε 03:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing covers from album infoboxes

Hi there. When you do changes like this, would you mind not removing the "| Cover =" line entirely, instead just removing the image from the line. Per WP:ALBUM#Code empty fields should not be removed, as keeping them makes it easier to add the information in the future, and keeps the formatting consistent. Thanks in advance. --PEJL 04:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert on WT:CSD?

Hi! I don't know if you meant to, but you reverted my addition of archival code on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion earlier today. I don't think it was intentional, because your edit summary didn't mention it, and you also added a comment do the page - perhaps an edit conflict? I've added the archival code again, I just wanted to make sure you didn't mean to revert that. Have a good day, --ST47Talk 18:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Book covers

Please note images of book covers are allowed in an article about the book in question to illustrate an article discussing the book in question. Stop deleting the book cover images at The Godmother: The True Story of the Hunt for the Most Bloodthirsty Female Criminal in Our Time, Griselda Blanco.

Please read the licensing:

{{Non-free book cover}} —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PianoKeys (talk • contribs) 00:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for some assistance

Hello ESkog, I was wondering if you would be so kind to help me with a page I'm working on. I added an Album Infobox at Home (This World Fair album) following guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums but for some reason the infobox is not appearing on the page. Can you please fix that so that the infobox appears? If not, can you please let me know what I can do to fix it? Thanks ManbirS 21:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)ManbirS[reply]

Hey again, thanks for checking up what can be done to get that infobox working. I'll be waiting for a response back as soon as you think you might be able to figure out a solution. ManbirS 21:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)ManbirS[reply]

Thanks for fixing the infobox for Home (This World Fair album) but now for some reason the same thing is happening again when I tried to edit TWF's 2nd album So Is Death & Love. Am I doing something wrong or is there something messed up with the code? If you could fix that too or let me know what to do, that'd be great. I'd still like to add infoboxes for another two of their albums so I don't want to keep running into these problems. Get back to me as soon as you can. Thanks!ManbirS 23:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)ManbirS[reply]

Thanks again for all the help.ManbirS 00:08, 9 July 2007 (UTC)ManbirS[reply]

Request for Information.

Hello,

About a year ago, you nominated Yogani for deletion, and the result was the move of the article to user space.

About a month later, the article was restored, and it has been there ever since. What do you suggest as an appropriate course of action here? --Aarktica 21:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mugshots

Mugshots are allowed at Wikipedia please read the licensing and rationale before you place over zealous +tags on images:

Licensing

Rationale

Rationale:

  1. to illustrate the person in question, Griselda Blanco.
  2. where no free alternative exists or could be created,

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by PianoKeys (talk • contribs) 09:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CHEK-TV logos

On the removal of the CHEK-TV logo gallery, while not all of the logos that were in there met WP:NFCC #8, the first batch in that gallery, the older logos dating between the late 1950s and 1991, do have historical significance, and their presence is more descriptive than words alone would be, so at least the older logos should be restored as they meet #8 in the NFCC. Creativity-II 19:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other stations' articles currently use galleries with logos of historical significance, and none of them have run into any problems, so why not CHEK? The "section describing the logos' significance", as you stated, is pretty much what the gallery is. Creativity-II 20:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stalking

hello, I notice that when I make an edit on an article within a few hours you show up and change my edit, I believe you are stalking me through "My Contributions" and I want that to stop as of now. PianoKeys 20:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes what you are doing is harassment and you know it, so stop. PianoKeys 20:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Image:kphe_id.png from KPHE-LP article

In your zeal to remove logo galleries, you have removed an image that does not violate the NFCC policy: Image:kphe_id.png. That image is referenced in commentary in the article and its removal would seriously detract from the commentary on the station's lack of production values during that point in the station's history. User 123lkik has already restored the image, plus the BVM images, which he claims are in the article by permission of the owner (I have informed him that the images must be released under GFDL or into the Public Domain). Please be more careful when removing images; just because an image is part of a gallery doesn't mean that it is in violation of NFCC. Thanks. dhett ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "Most Wanted" Status from Clarence Vaughn

It's hardly "private eyeing" when a state lists you as one of its "10 Most Wanted" and the info comes up in the first page of a google search. Additionally, this isn't a first to have this info around, Deltha O'Neal has a sentence about a 2006 arrest for a DUI, Terrence Kiel has a section on his lawbreaking, etc. Does this mean all the NFL sports figures need their criminal info off their wikipedia entries? Draeya 00:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletions at Quixtar

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from Wikipedia. Please be more careful when editing pages and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

Do not remove the corporate links because you dont see them relevant. 75.73.188.53 04:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was my intention, and it's most certainly not vandalism. Quit the gamesmanship and engage in the conversation on the Talk page. (ESkog)^(Talk) 04:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for defending my rationale for removing the links. David D. (Talk) 05:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rationale? for removing links? 75.73.188.53 07:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is your strawman version. They remain in the reference section. We are still waiting for any attempt by yourself to present a rationale for bloating the external links section. David D. (Talk) 17:29, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! What you did

I saw you removing all the fair use images from The Offspring. It's a bitch to do it, but good job doing the right thing. Right now I'm going through a lot of artist and discography pages looking for album covers to get rid of and other bad images. I got your back. Keep up the good work.++aviper2k7++ 05:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image Fair Use

I saw you recently added a fair use disputed tag to the image Image:Futurama 102 - Episode Two The Series Has Landed.jpg, I have attempted to update the fair use rationale for this image to be acceptable. I'd like your opinion on whether this now meets WP:NFCC. I have been trying to coordinate an effort to get the fair use rationales on Futurama images up to snuff and would appreciate some guidance. Thanks for your time. Star dust 8212 20:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fear and Loathing

In your edit summary on Image:Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (DVD cover).jpg, you say "dispute resolved". For reference, can you point to a talk page or other venue where discussion took place that resolved the dispute? I'm only trying to gain a clearer understanding over what's permissible as fair use and what isn't. Thank you! — WiseKwai 08:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University of Saskatchewan

Noticed you were a member of Wikiproject Canada - Education.... Celebrate the Centennial University of Saskatchewan Anniversary in the year 2007. Would you please go to Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive and vote for this University of Saskatchewan article!!! Tell any and all other editors / U of S students you know who wiki to vote also please!!! Please help Celebrate the Anniversary of the U of S University of Saskatchewan Academics Talk Please help to bring the article to feature status !!!SriMesh | talk 03:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Big Thanks

I wanted to thank you for keeping my User Page clean and vandalism free. I see that someone has now put a bot in place to take care of the clean up, but as I expected the knuckleheads are back at it. Anyway, I appreciate your help, and that of the other admins who do their best to keep idiots like the anonymous coward from making a mockery of what you try to do here. And the truth shall set you free! 22:03, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request to replace 2 images

I would like to replace the main images for Tiff and Tuff, please. Two reasons:

1. It's better if each image contained solo characters. 2. If they contained multiple characters, it might be complicated to see who's the main character in the image.

I promise I will not upload any more images than this -- 2 is quite a very limited number for using screenshots. I will also put up fair use rationales for both.

I tried to contact the uploaders for the original images, but they didn't respond. Thank you. Jonghyunchung 20:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply : But before I do that, could you please remind these users:

Kirbyfan103

N. Harmonik

Ivyna J. Spyder‎

...that the images that they recently uploaded are about to be replaced to make things more simple? Jonghyunchung 20:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misia discography

Can you please explain why you removed all the album & single images from the "Misia discography" page ?

Redracer69 00:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Den Ange Divorce.jpg

Hi, i've done my best to clarify a FUR for the image use in those 6 articles, but I did not add the images to all of the articles, so it is just my interpretation of why editors have chosen to use it. Please let me know whether it's ok or not. ThanksGungadin 13:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Civility in AFD discussions

Without responding to comments in a request for deletion, there is no discussion. The whole purpose of having a request is to have a discussion. If people are unwilling to discuss then they shouldn't be there. Its not a vote, but a discussion. NobutoraTakeda 19:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image Removal

I noticed that you removed on my user page the Tisch School of the Arts' Torch image from my userbox, "This user graduated from...." I was wondering why you were editing my user page and why, in particular, you removed this image. I was under the impression that one's own user page was his/her domain and was to be edited only by him/her (assuming s/he is not violating wikipedia policy). Was there something wrong with that image? If so, I was unaware. Please inform...

Respectfully, Ask123 ask123 21:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I got your response. Thanks for the explanation. Next time, though, kindly leave me a message, and I will complete the task myself. Please, please do not edit my page without my permission. Many thanks! Be well. ask123 21:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Daisy

I was removed the voice and the appearance because they might merged it maybe. 70.16.135.201 22:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]