User talk:Kenlukus

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	They call it humour! Kenlukus (talk) 02:00, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Burgess mills.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Burgess mills.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:07, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:St. Anne's Church.jpg

Regarding File:St. Anne's Church.jpg: did you photograph the church, or did you photograph a postcard or other illustration of the church? If it's the latter, then we also need to know the copyright status of the postcard: its copyright status can't be dodged because you took a photo of it. —C.Fred (talk) 01:43, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brown Company

Regarding your message over on the talk page, I have resolved the issue with the copyrighted material in the history section, and left open just a short paragraph. I have also removed that big blue template (I am a copyright clerk so I am allowed to remove it) so feel free to add stuff the history section whenever you like. Minima © (talk) 07:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Burgess mills.jpg needs authorship information.

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Burgess mills.jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which:{{subst:usernameexpand|Kenlukus}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or use the {{own}} template.

If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Delano.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Delano.gif. 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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:20, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image information

I've noticed that you are uplaoding some images but not applying all the appropriate information necessary in the form we use. Except for the date of the photo, because there is no metadata, I have added an information template and added all the data I can see from your upload. Please fill in the date on this iamge File:Insiderussianchurch.jpg and make sure your other upload have all the details, such a author, source and description. Even if you state that the image is in the public domain you must add the appropriate copyright tag to every image; prose is not sufficient. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 03:51, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:St. Anne's Church.jpg

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on File:St. Anne's Church.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 05:15, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

August 2011

Your addition to File:St._Anne's_Church.jpg has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. This image was uploaded to this[1] site apparently 4 years ago. I find it difficult to believe you created it 3 days ago, yet they uploaded it on or before 12/30/2007 ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 05:18, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Burgess mills.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Burgess mills.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 05:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to File:Burgess mills.jpg has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Another from the same site ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 05:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Insiderussianchurch.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Insiderussianchurch.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 05:48, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Holy resurrection orthodox church nh.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Holy resurrection orthodox church nh.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 05:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the fourth image copyvio I have found. At this time, I apologize, but I must report you for blatant, intentional, indiscriminate copyright violations. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 05:58, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Image copyright violations by User:Kenlukus. Thank you.ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 06:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've commented at ANI as it seems that some of the images are PD. Looks like you might need help with licencing though. Mjroots (talk) 10:29, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, it's a big non-no to claim others work as your own. Editors have been blocked in the past for persistent commitment of this offence. I looked at the source for the Burgess Mills image, and it seems that many of the images of old postcards there are PD. That does not mean that you can claim them as your images. Even where a postcard is PD, such as File:Upper Deal 1907.jpg, due attribtion of the author is still required. Mjroots (talk) 10:35, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you guys will give me a second chance. I'm new to the whole computer thing. I'm just an old man trying to help out my birth state thats all. I will look in to things more if and when I wish to upload an image next time. --Kenlukus (talk) 18:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please use this link: Image copyright violations by User:Kenlukus to make your responses. Key points I would suggest you address particularly deal with the image you claimed you made a few days ago and any questions (or your level of understanding) on copyright issues. I would also suggest that you remove any other images you have uploaded with incorrect copyright claims and then work with others to determine if uploading them to Wikipedia is appropriate. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 22:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As part of the aforementioned Administrator's Noticeboard discussion:

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/1shields1. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing Issue: FDR image File:Delano.gif

Hi Ken, I have fixed the erroneous licensing information you put on the Delano.gif file [2]. It is indeed in the public domain (it was taken in 1906), but now accurately portrays the source, including catalog # for confirmation. Thus, in going through any other images you have uploaded, you do not have to worry about that one (since I've already fixed it). I would suggest that if you have had other accounts in the past, that you clean up any image copyright violations there as well. Feel free to ask me for help if you need it. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 23:12, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not.

If you are not a sock puppet, and would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kenlukus (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I know I made mistakes in the past and I made this new account to start fresh. I know I need help with pictures though. Other than the pics I did not push any websites, I just asked if we should put it for historical info on Berlin N.H., the place where I was born. Before when the 1shields1 came on, it was my sisters's son's kids that came up for a weekend and they went on the computer and messed it up. When I found out I made this new account. The mistakes I made on my old account are copyeddits and stuf like that. Like I said before, I know I made mistakes in the past but if you give me one more chance, I will try to do everything right this time! I'm just an old man trying to help out his home state (New Hampshire) and home town (Berlin) and I know that theres a lot of work that needs to be done and I could fix it. I was born in 1933 (not 1935 like I said before!) and I'm 78, my life is almost over and I would like to help people learn about history and other things that need to be written down on Wikipedia that are not or it has "certification needed". I know I'm new to this computer thing but next time someone I don't trust on the computer I will lock the door to the computer room. The reason why They put "Berlin New Hampshire History" on berlins site is because I was talking to there mom and told them that some one had removed it and I was upset but left it like that. I'm very sorry wikipedia and if you give me an other chance I will do it right this time. Very sorry, Ken Lukus Kenlukus (talk) 13:50, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your story is not credible. Besides the usual dodge of blaming a younger relative, how do you manage to be 78 and 76 at the same time? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:08, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I would suggest coming clean about all the accounts. Also, I've found images on at least one of the other accounts that seemed to have suffered the same mis-tagging. And really; four accounts? (this one, 1shields1, Berlinnh1 and Nova-Gnostic).
You also still have not responded with a list of what other images you have uploaded that have incorrect copyright claims.
No one cares that you are not 78. You've (in an earlier statement someplace) revealed a rough idea of your real age. We've got young contributors who successfully become a very valued part of the community. Heck, we even have some admins in their mid teens who are well respected. Truth is, no one cares what your age is at all. How you contribute and comport yourself here is all that your fellow editors care about.
While I had made an offer to mentor you, that offer (and an unblock) will not occur until you are forthcoming with a plausible answer and accept responsibility. IF at some point, you do get unblocked, and select me as your mentor, be advised I take sockpuppetry and copyright violations very seriously. Mistakes I am fine with (depending on how you deal with them). ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 14:26, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to it being odd that "your nephew's kids" have the exact same misspelling of cousin as you, and that you can't keep your age consistant, that your account only appears after the others have been blocked, and that 1shields1 claims to be you, it's also kinda odd that one of a pseudo-Gnostic site that "your nephew's kids" pushed is by a claimed Delano descendant from the same area. It's also odd you added an entry for a made up language to one article that is featured on the pseudo-Gnostic site "your nephew's kids" pushed.

To put it simply: you need to grow up and quit constantly lying. If you don't intend to lie when you're stealing copyrighted work, mixing up your age, or playing Da Vinci Code, then I strongly recommend asking your doctor to test you for dementia-related illness such as Alzheimer's. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adding swastikas to people's names is the last straw. Access to talk page is blocked. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 20:40, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]