User talk:Infrogmation/Archive Nov 09 - July 10

Archive of discussion from User talk:Infrogmation

Next older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive July 09 - Nov 09

Next more recent: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive Aug 10 - Aug 11

Palenque

Hi, is there a reason you keep removing information from the caption I provided for the 1787 drawing? The image is currently a featured picture candidate and effective captioning is part of the basis upon which these images get reviewed. Additional information is welcome, yet when data gets removed without discussion that could affect reviewer reactions. You seem to put a lot of attention into that article; wondering what's on your mind. Regards, Durova³⁵⁷ 03:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. My edits were motivated to improve the caption, making it more informative and accurate. I added information about what was shown. I removed text that didn't seem helpful in the context of the article, such as describing a carving as "Mayan" (the adjective should be Maya, and as everything at Palenque is Maya, as the Palenque article explains in the lede, saying so in an image caption in the article seems redundant. I removed the phrase "digitally restored" from one of the captions as, that seems contrary to usual Wikipedia practice-- such info as whether it was scanned from a book in one's own collection, digitally cleaned up, photographed with a certain type of camera, etc, is generally included in the image description page, but not repeated in the caption of the article unless such details are directly relevent to understanding the topic of the article. I'm sorry if the reasons for my changes in an attempt to improve captions weren't clear as I thought they would be. If you more questions feel free to ask; let me know if I've inadverntantly made anything less accurate and useful, and if there are any disputes as to how best word something, I suggest we take discussion to the talk page of the article where others interested in the subject can offer their insights as well. Thanks for your work. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 04:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images

There's two images of an dog those are my only personal images. The only one that isn't from me is the file that I think has an proper source and licensing is an star one because I learned where it originally came from but I also found out there was another image of it. Also the Gloria Grant one should be fine for I have done comic book images and I know how they work. Jhenderson777 (talk) 21:19, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I notice that one too. Wow there was so many of them. No that one ain't an original one either. Anyways I am guessing you can't get pictures from photobucket.com even though it's is an picture sharing site. So anyways these pictures files are mine but not originally and I would think they would be free but I don't know. Jhenderson777 (talk) 21:25, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much. Again, just be honest and accurate, and if you're not sure about something and you can't find an answer, ask. Remember you can't take credit for images created by someone else. Re stuff like photobucket: don't mistake free to look at as being the same thing as being free from copyright. Copyrighted material by other can only be used in certain limited contexts with "fair use" rationale; see Wikipedia:Non-free content for details. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 21:27, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did the Hurricane Katrina in Space one have to be deleted. Because I did do the right license on that one. It's from Nasa! Jhenderson777 (talk) 21:33, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NASA works are fine, yes. But the image you uploaded was sourced not to NASA, but to photobucket user Sarah1631, who clearly was not the creator; the photobucket user simply had a collection of images yoinked from the web without info or attribution. For NASA images, try to find them in a NASA website or publication, or some reliable 2ndary site that gives proper info and attribution. It needs to have some verifiable info, so others could check and confirm it is a NASA work from the source. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 06:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ruby Bridges article

Hello,

It appears the Ruby Bridges article has been vandalized again. I'm not sure of the technical procedure of undoing that many edits at once. Would you please look at it and fix it? Perhaps the article needs protected again. -- Thank you. Michael David (talk) 22:53, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :-). -- Michael David (talk) 23:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Feel free to revert by going to article history, then edit the last undamaged edit to return to it. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:23, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Frost image

The image in question, was part of a film project that I was involved in as screenwriter, original author and technical consultant. In the research phase, I obtained the rights to the extant Avro Aircraft film archives and the image was a still from an original 16 mm print that was used in the forthcoming book and documentary film. At the conclusion of the project, I retained rights to the research material. FWiW, can you please restore "Viper_Test_rig.jpg" which is another image from the same body of material. Bzuk (talk) 17:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I suggest you add an explanation similar to the above to the image description pages, in addition to a short description of the original source and what is shown in each image. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I checked File:Viper_Test_rig.jpg, it was deleted 07:43, 25 July 2009 by User:Rettetast reason ‎ "Listed on PUI for over two weeks". If we can come up with some satisfactory info explaining the copyright situtation for similar images, I think it can be applied to that one as well, thanks. -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, thanks

Apparently I forgot to change the date, too.[1] :-) Regards, —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 07:25, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

block on hold User talk:209.247.22.164

I tend to agree with what the ip has said in their defense, but if there is something I'm missing I'd like your feedback before unblocking. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- I left a comment there. No objection to unblocking, though keeping an eye on this ip# for a while might not be a bad idea. -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:45, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice

Nice--thanks! You made me realize that I forgot to do that. Drmies (talk) 02:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sidney Bechet

Hello, this is a long shot really, but I was wondering how knowledgeable you are on Bechet. In putting together the recent article on Sugar Blue, I found a cited quotation that I also included in Bechet's article. However, User:Fayenatic london pointed out that Bechet never recorded a piece called "Sugar Blues" ! This makes the quotation, and both article's wording look rather silly. Any suggestions ?

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the message. I appreciate the recognition ; ) Happy Holidays! --Chekereter (talk) 07:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sun Records (somewhat less famous)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sun Records (somewhat less famous), and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.wacklepedia.com/s/su/sun_records.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:21, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a mirror of an old version of Wikipedia's Sun Records article. I'm in the process of splitting off an article on the non-Memphis based Sun Records into own article from various versions of the history of Sun Records article. -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:24, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you the original creator of the text in the Sun Records (other companies) article? If not, attribution is required in the history per Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Regards, The leftorium 00:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess I could be called the "original" creator of it in that I started the text that's in it back in 2003 when it was part of the Sun Records article [2]. Others contributed as well since. As is mentioned at Talk:Sun Records (other companies), it was split off from the Sun Records article. While I'd be happy to have the information about Sun Records remain at the Sun Records article, as the history and talk page there shows other editors are vehemently of other opinions. I see from Wikipedia:Splitting that the article splitting procedure seems to have gotten significantly more involved since last time I split an article from an existing one. Suggestions about the best procedures to go from here on? Thanks. Cheers. -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I added a note in the history ([3]) and a {{copied}} template to the talk page. I think that should do it. :) Regards, The leftorium 10:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat discussion for Juliancolton RfB

A bureaucrat discussion has been opened in order to determine the consensus in this request for adminship. Please come participate. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Service awards proposal

Hello, Infrogmation/Archive Nov 09 - July 10! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.

If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:FarrarAsManon.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:FarrarAsManon.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Be nice to get the data so it can go on commons Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Service award update

Hello, Infrogmation! The requirements for the service awards have been updated, and you may no longer be eligible for the award you currently display. Don't worry! Since you have already earned your award, you are free to keep displaying it. However, you may also wish to update to the current system.

Sorry for any inconvenience. — the Man in Question (in question) 10:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Infrogmation! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 317 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Lionel Ferbos - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Jean Redpath - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Francisco Luna Kan - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Ileana Cotrubaş - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 18:11, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:1957 OU Chase.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:1957 OU Chase.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:03, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help with New Orleans wards

I'm reworking National Register of Historic Places listings in Orleans Parish, Louisiana into a format used by the majority of National Register lists nationwide. Because the "city or town" column in the table is pointless for Orleans Parish, I'm going to convert it into a column for wards. However, I don't know the city at all — I've never been closer than Baton Rouge, and I was ten years old then — and I can't find any maps newer than the ones at Wards of New Orleans. Could you help me fill in the wards column? Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 20:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The ward boundaries in the newer of the two maps are still identical. The 9th continues off the right end of the map to the Orleans Parish line. I've clarified the caption. Does this answer your question? Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:54, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I should note that some of the reigisterd historic districts cross Ward boundary lines. -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, not — I don't think I can find sites on small side streets with this map. Do you know of any more detailed maps? As far as multiple-ward districts — the pieces into which National Register of Historic Places listings in Denver, Colorado is divided include many districts that are in multiple neighborhoods. Nyttend (talk) 01:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting your opinion

Hi. I've started a discussion here. (Actually, it's a restart of a prior discussion that went cold; you can just scroll directly down to the first post I made today in that section if you want.) Can you offer your thoughts? I think it's very important. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congregation Beth Israel (New Orleans, Louisiana)

Nice pictures. Thanks for taking them! Jayjg ^(talk) 03:36, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Hurricane Katrina fringe theories

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Hurricane Katrina fringe theories. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hurricane Katrina fringe theories. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finally unblocked

Is there any reason you blocked me or do you just like blocking innocent people? user:Sub619—Preceding undated comment added 15:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC).[reply]

False death notices of prominent people along with assorted vandalism, previous warnings and shorter block. Explained clearly in your block notice, as if you didn't know. Your statement about "do you just like blocking innocent people?" is absurd and insulting. Please edit responsibly and try to interact with other editors with Wikipedia:Civility. Thank you. -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Batt

I removed it because I didn't think that any elections he participated in before 2006 would be important; but if you think it is necessary to have it then I won't fight you over it. -BLM Platinum (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Well, the only election he actually won to date was one of those before 2006, so I think that'd be relevent. :-) Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MaRaineyParamount.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MaRaineyParamount.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 10:14, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Time Cube

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Time Cube. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Time Cube (6th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Police Gazette

There is a little bit of confusion on the Police Gazette page right now. Since you created the page and updated a few times I though you might have some useful information. A new single purpose account has add some info one of the other editors thinks maybe dubious and asked for my help. The user is claiming that the [Police Gazette is still being published and not really defunct. It seems like a CIO issue because of the single purpose account and the name of the account kind of really push it there. Assuming good faith but I gave him a CIO notice just in case. Not sure what to do. I asked Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange could verify the magazine is still in print but I'm wondering if you know. ZacBowling ^(user|talk) 04:30, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Country singers

I have nominated Category:Country singers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Country music singers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 13:53, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request of 147.126.46.146

Hello Infrogmation. 147.126.46.146 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 14:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added my comment on the talk page there. Given the insults and blatant vandalism from that ip#, I'd be inclined to leave the block as is, but would not oppose if another admin wishes to try tweaking it and keeping an eye on activity. Thanks. -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Exceedingly lengthy blocks

There is an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:Blocking IP addresses#IP block length which you may wish to review and comment upon. –xeno^talk 20:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. Infrogmation (talk)

File:LouiseMecklenburg.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:LouiseMecklenburg.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 03:28, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal is back

The vandal that you blocked and warned is back. 198.60.1.105 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Vandal is back from Vanadlism Block and has vandalised History of Buddhism in India, History of Rajputs. Origin of Rajputs, Jat Muslim AlphaGamma1991 (talk) 21:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:File:FautauaFalls.jpg

Hello, Infrogmation. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 02:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:EBerlinerGramophoneDisc.png

Thanks for uploading File:EBerlinerGramophoneDisc.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 06:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RCA Records

There is an IP address which is vandalizing the RCA Records article, so please monitor the article as I'm getting close to 3RR to undo the damage if he/she does it again. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Galarina.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Galarina.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:49, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply left on your talk page. As the description page already has a pair of fair use rationale templates, I'm not sure what more is needed. Suggestions welcome. Thanks. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to explain carefully how it meets the WP:NFCC criteria :) The fairuse license tags by themselves aren't enough. I've added a basic FUR to the image, some tidying up would be appreciated :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much! Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Old suspected copyvios

Hi Infrogmation. Do you remember what was happening with this ancient diff? I'm trying to figure out whether we copied from elsewhere or someone else copied from us. There is also this from an IP. The Salvador Dali situation is similar. Both pages on artinthepicture.com date back in WaybackMachine to 2005 or 2006, but the site has been archiving since 2003.--Chaser (talk) 22:48, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can remember. I had read some books on Dali recently, and was summarizing some info in my own words. To get any dates and quotes right that I didn't know off the top of my head, I would have double checked the books, specifically Dali's own "Secret Life", "The Shameful Life of Salvador Dali" by Ian Gibson, and/or "Dali The Paintings" by Robert Descharnes and Gilles Neret. Except for the direct quotations, the wording I added there is my own. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 23:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Infrog. I'll contact the webmaster. Do you mind if I direct him/her to this thread?--Chaser (talk) 23:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 23:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK I figured I'd re-write the basic material - which is relevant in my own words . If you gain permission - you have my permission to revert my recent additions there, or incorporate my stuff with the old stuff :)...Modernist (talk) 01:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Motivation sought

I know that it's customary for most users, not just the elite such as yourself, to give no thought to the reverting of edits by the lonely anonymous IP editor, so I don't take this personally. And as it is not my habit to edit war, and as it is my habit to discuss matters fully, might I inquire as to why you reverted my edits? You provided zero explanation in your edit summaries. My guess is that one of my several edits didn't sit well with you, and you reverted the lot of them; I'm guessing that since you did see fit to then return one of my changes (the inclusion of the prefix "re-" after your original revert).

But seriously, what were you thinking? I'm looking at this edit, for example. That edit was placed there in August of 2006, and was perfectly timely then, but now is almost certainly incorrect and today just sounds plain awkward. Are we to believe that Nagin stayed holed up in his office for four years? If that was true, it'd been the subject of an entire paragraph of its own.

I'll not do anything right now, but my edits were all thoughtful, well-considered improvements, and I'd like to return them to the article. Please let me know what it is that you object to, and perhaps I'll understand and I'll just put back the other stuff. Or, if I disagree with you, we can discuss it further (I am always open to persuasion, just not to bullying). For someone to have risen to the position you hold, you obviously are capable of rational discussion; that is all I ask for. 98.82.34.167 (talk) 20:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My prime motivation in undoing your edit is that you broke an image link by changing an image name from an actual image to a non existant image. A quick look at the rest of your edit showed the addition the phrase "Lame Duck" to the lede just 2 days before the person was about to leave office, which didn't seem to me to be particularly useful, as well as soon to be out of date. As a whole your edits seemed to me to do more harm to the article than good, thus the revert. I noticed a change in one sentence from "election" to "re-election" which I thought was a useful clarification, so I re-added that. I'm glad to know about your postive motivations. If you break an image by accident (as I'll now presume was the cause), please revert or fix it your self, or if you don't know how, ask for help. If you wish to continue to make useful edits here, I offer you a hearty welcome, and suggest you chose a user name and Log in. Cheers! -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. Ummmm, I'm totally confused about the breaking image link thing. I was totally unaware about that, and still don't really understand. Could you show me which specific edit caused that problem, so that I don't do it again? Thanks. 98.82.34.167 (talk) 23:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

edit here. It was the most recent change to the article, thus the first I saw. I'm guessing now you were trying to edit the caption of the image, but instead you edited the name of the image, resulting in a broken image. Thanks. Infrogmation (talk) 23:49, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, now I see it. And you are correct, I was just trying to change the caption. Thanks for the courteous exchange. I'm going to go back now and redo a little of what I had done. I'll yield to you on the lame duck issue (I see your point about the timing, but repectfully disagree), and probably most of the other stuff will go back in. Cheers. 98.82.34.167 (talk) 01:08, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weird Katrina Fridge Edit

Hey Infrogmation,

The edit I did on the Katrina Refrigerator article was done to remove a stray '|' character from the text...in re-reviewing my edits, it turns out that the profanity editor on my browser also replaced both instances of 'scr*p' with 'scr*p', because it saw the sequence 'cr*p' in the word. I have since changed these back! Is that what you noticed? Fanboy1986 (talk) 06:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you turned the phrase "scrap metal" into "scr*p metal". Highly inapporpriate. Scrap is a perfecly decent term, not even a mild profanity. If your browser has something that inserts random asterisks into perfectly legitimate words, I'd strongly suggest you turn that feature or bug off when editing Wikipedia. Thanks. Infrogmation (talk) 11:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:BoingBoingShirt1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:BoingBoingShirt1.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:11, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FUR added. Infrogmation (talk) 02:57, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Tubby Hall

I have nominated Tubby Hall, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tubby Hall. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. moɳo 04:04, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:FigueresTower.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:FigueresTower.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Tremé Gallery

Thanks for putting up the pictures :). They're nice.

Film editor seeks consent....

Infrogmation, hello, I am Tom Roche, and I am in the FQ right now editing a documentary about the levees/floodwall failures directed by certain well-known New Orleanian. I saw a few photos you took on Wiki Commons, and would like your permission to use them. On your page however you said to ask first. I am somewhat unfamiliar with Commons and couldn't find any direct e-mail link to you so I trying to contact you here. Can you please shoot me an e-mail if you are interested in hearing more about this project? I am at troche2255 in the gmail world. Thanks and regards. Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.204.172.233 (talk) 17:26, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An email has been sent to you. However to clarify, my photos on Wikimedia Commons are free for reuse with attribution according to the license or licenses specified on each individual photo description page. As long as the reuse complies with that, no additional permission is needed. Most of my photos are licensed under Creative Commons "CC-BY" licenses http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/ which basically only requires an image credit line. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 11:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:MaRaineyParamount.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:MaRaineyParamount.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of New Orleans Records

A tag has been placed on New Orleans Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 11:56, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Clover Records

A tag has been placed on Clover Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 12:15, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cavalier Records

A tag has been placed on Cavalier Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 12:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Infrogmation. You have new messages at Codf1977's talk page.
Message added 13:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Clover Records

I have nominated Clover Records, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clover Records. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Codf1977 (talk) 13:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Infrogmation. You have new messages at Codf1977's talk page.
Message added 13:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of New Orleans Records

I have nominated New Orleans Records, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Orleans Records. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Codf1977 (talk) 13:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Crescent Records

I have nominated Crescent Records, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crescent Records. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Codf1977 (talk) 13:31, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:UKRegalRecord1.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UKRegalRecord1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted It has already been copied to Commons as it has been determined to be PD (I didn't so tag it when I first uploaded it here as I wasn't sure of UK copyright status then. Infrogmation (talk) 10:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Palenque Relief.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Palenque Relief.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 10:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tikal Records

A tag has been placed on Tikal Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 18:31, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TikalRecord.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TikalRecord.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:28, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Nitto Records

A tag has been placed on Nitto Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 12:59, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of RCU Records

A tag has been placed on RCU Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 15:56, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:NittoRecord.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NittoRecord.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:NittoRecord.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NittoRecord.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:38, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NOLA bicycle transportation subsection on New Orleans entry

Hey man. I love the work you do on Wikipedia. I've seen your name on a lot of NOLA stuff. I just wanted to give you a heads up about a request I just put in about creating a bicycle subsection for the New Orleans entry. You seem to have some good bicycle pictures. Cheers! 71.161.242.92 (talk) 06:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good Work

Thank you for your contribution of File:Coastal City School Bus crop.JPG to Green Lantern (film). It is nice to see editors such as yourself taking the initiative and going out to provide us with free content.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:NittoRecord.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NittoRecord.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Nitto Records

An article that you have been involved in editing, Nitto Records, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nitto Records. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:44, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Time Cube

I have nominated Time Cube, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Time Cube (7th nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ScienceApologist (talk) 16:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archive of discussion from User talk:Infrogmation

Next older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive July 09 - Nov 09

Next more recent: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive Aug 10 - Aug 11