This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Licensing on images
You seem to have an issue with English or copyright laws or something. There are certain things you should notice when it comes to uploading images and tagging them with their copyright information.
You cannot license copyrighted images as GFDL simply because you feel like it. I've seen through most of your uploaded images, and you license them all as GFDL until someone fixes the license for you.
When others, like myself, fix your licenses on images, or remove incorrect ones, you often just revert them back without giving any edit summary or reasoning anywhere. This is highly disruptive. Please state the reason for what you're doing in that little edit summary box below.
Please correct your behavior so that I won't have to take this further to WP:RFC or similar.
I will revert your faulty revert on Image:Czech_RM70_02.jpg again, and the next time you revert back, please offer a reason, either here or in the edit summary. Thank you.
Just to let you know I am undergoing a similar thing at wikiquote simple english. If you want I will tell you more about it. Happy new year. --Sir James Paul05:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Shoe Zone
In December last year you reverted deliberate advertisments on the article Shoe Zone. I've just reverted another advert on it. Also I've categorised it under the category, shoe companies. So it's all sorted out now.
Rasillon11:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use rationale for Image:ACSC sports01.jpg
This file may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading Image:ACSC sports01.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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. MECU≈talk21:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use rationale for Image:ACSC auditorium.jpg
This file may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading Image:ACSC auditorium.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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. MECU≈talk21:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lahiru
Please remove the pictures from Gongala Massacre. Among other things, it's highly disrepectful of the dead to be used in such a manner. I appreciate your attention in this. NinaNina Odell16:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I realize that these pictures are elsewhere, but they do not belong on Wikipedia. If people want to see them, let them go to those sites. Thank you. NinaNina Odell16:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Currently, there are as many pictures as text. There are an inordinate number of pictures for an article of this size. Also, the article needs to "move on" as it were, to describe any potential aftermath, response from the Sri Lankan government, etc. I understand completely your desire for the inclusion of these photographs. Please consider Wikipedia. Sincerely, Nina Odell17:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I really appreciate all your efforts to help the overall quality of this article. You fixed things I don't know how to fix. Thank you. Nina Odell17:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome Nina, I have removed two pics on your request but please do not ask from me to remove other two as well because you have to understand pain in my heart. 17:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:LTTE Atrocities - Ampara 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:LTTE Atrocities - Ampara 1.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.
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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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.
These images do not qualify as free-use because the copyright holder prohibits their modification and redistribution (check the note on derivative images at {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}}). The provisions outlined at the source websites most likely deal with fair use, they are not an unconditional release of copyright. Use of these photographs may qualify under Wikipedia fair use criteria, but then they will have to be tagged with something like {{HistoricPhoto}} and each instance of use would have to be backed up by a fair use rationale. I'm sorry to say that I am not going to remove the PUI tags from them at this time, but if you desire to contest their license status, please feel free to do so at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images#January_2. ˉˉanetode╦╩17:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have no intention or desire to rename this article. It's in the body of the article that neutral language must be used. As I understand it, this is a rebellion, and not yet a civil war. So even the phrase war crime cannot as yet be used. Until the Sri Lankan Government openly declares war on the LTTE, these are murders. Read the article you gave me again and look at the language. Nina Odell17:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Remember too, that all these events are relatively current, and such can open fresh wounds for the victims' families (even distant family members). Please consider this in relation to the photos. Nina Odell17:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I misread the situation. I had no idea that there were multiple editors here. I also think that this may be our fork in the road. I won't get into edit wars. I've done all I can, and trust Peter with moving forward. Best of fortune to you, Nina Odell04:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A request
I think you are following my edits, there is a policy against it. Please read it before I escalate this. Thanks RaveenS
It is a damn good excuse:))), one even I would use but I will keep an eye on this situation in the future but as needed in resolving conflicts I have made my request to you. Thanks RaveenS
State terrorism in Sri Lanka
Hi Lahiru_k you had reverted a link in this article saying its spam, probably you didn't watch the video. Its a BBC documentry on JVP insurrection and other humanitarian issues in Sri Lanka. No worries I have restored the link. ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗ14:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hey machan i now knw it is not acceptable. I am new to wiki and only grabbin the concept. please look over the edited article FutureSinhala and make chnages if neccessary. if required even remove my name.
i didn't put ugg boot on there. i don't know what you're talking about
Work for you Pal
I have a suggestion for you. That is to create the following articles List of massacres attributed to the LTTE, Terrorism by LTTE' because the second article will balance out the State terrorism by Sri Lanka article and the first one will balance out an article that I am going to create. Awaiting your reply. My idea is that one day we can cobine all these into singular articles such as Terrorismn in Sri Lanka and Massacres in Sri Lanka but for now seperate ones will do. Thanks RaveenS13:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lahiru
I don't understand what you're doing. Please talk to me. I'm free to help now that the Neutrality Project case is closed. I want to support everyone in these matters. Nina Odell16:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I had to do this
I opened a case because I think both you are the same [1] if not my apologies. ThanksRaveenS
Yeah no need to apologies, you are trying to make sure what you are thinking and you are just follow the basic actions. But I know who I am and I hereby I ask from you to take back that request and post it after the TFD was over with along the Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. Because its says "Vote fraud on ongoing vote - Wait until vote closes before listing".
We all have been vote there and and if you ask for a checkuser now they will decline that. Checkuser is the easiest way to prove me that we not sockpuppets. I hope that you will reconsider about my above requests. Thank you --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie21:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was a bit distracted for sometime due to some articles regarding the terrorist attacks that was carried out against innocent civilians in my country by one of the bloodiest terrorist group in the world in the name of their liberation. By reading whole of this section brother what I can see is, you have had a dispute with someone and you thought to retire from editing Wikipedia. Giving up what you are doing is your decision but, once Martin Luther King Jr. said as on my userpage, "We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope". We all die someday as we were borne to this world. And what we have collected from this world, we have to leave behind including our loved once and what we can take is only the respect we collect from others for the good work we have committed. May be you don't know there was a Wikipedian called RickK. He was fighting against vandalism in Wikipedia long time ago (nearly two years ago) and now he is fully retired from editing, but still some Wikipedians respect what he has done to the betterment of Wikipedia. As a result, the Barnstar For Fighting Against Vandalism award was named after him. I saw during the past months that you were trying to do some thing like that for the community with some of your friends. And you also invited me to the council of that, but unfortunately i was distracted for some other work as i mentioned above. As you know, I am fighting against the LTTE's propaganda campaign and spreading bias campaign on Wikipedia. There are also such campaigns regarding your country too and what I suggest is that you too should fight against those because as I mentioned earlier, you can only carry the respect you collect from others and we all have a responsibility to work towards them. As other users, I too ask from you to do not give up what was you are doing, don't take back your step that you kept forward and take the strength from all the obstacles that you have to face and go for the goal and we are always with you. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie04:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh thanks brother . I never did think that you were disillusioned because of the edit wars on Sri Lankan conflict related topics. I have been here nearly 4 n half months and I always had to face such experiences. RaveenS has been here for 11 months and both of us and every other user have been facing such problems and none of them gave up editing. Why? That's because we all have an infinite hope that we regret to lose. But some people like Elalan, after they have been confirmed as sock puppets of another user, became a blatant vandal and I was accused as a sock puppeteer for some thing I didn't do and I was blocked for one week. Have you ever been accused for some thing you didn't do and punished? At least on your school days? I have been once and with this incidence the count was raised up to two. Ater that I was really disappointed and I thought to give up editing but I didn't give up my infinite hope. So there's no point in doing something like giving up editing for a simple matter. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie07:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply
saving you some time from checking my talk area. ::In reply, though I stated TamilNet, I believe I also mentioned a pattern of behavior, for example look at this, now not only is this edit somewhat inflametory and is certainly controversial, it was quickly reverted by another individual, at which, the Anon user snubbed his nose at the proposal for discussion and the warning posted on his page by simply re-adding the word terrorist. I have been through the majority of his contributions and he has all the wholemarks of a vandal and has periodically came onto Wikipedia to make snuff edits and then not justifiy himself nor make any attempt to improve his editing over the 7 months that he has been making such edits on Wikipedia among such criticism. I stand by my warning and if removed I hope that you will replace it before I do. I also find it somewhat disturbing how you might of found of such a warning, which leads me to believe that you watch my contributions, which is tantamount to cyberstalking, which is just weird and creepy if true.
Huh, look here, there's nothing a bit important and valuable I see in your contributions, than destructions, that makes me come behind you. For your information, I've been having Tamilnet in my watchlist for a pretty long time and I have a right to go through its edits and I certainly don't need any instructions from you regarding that. Happy Editing!!! --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie06:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What I learned from Nagerkovil article is that what we can and not use Tamilnet, Tamilcanadian and Tamilnation as sources for. What we can use is when they are the primary sources of information but if they are secondary sources for such notes as UN reports etc then it is better to use the primary source if it is available. Look at what Shuniker had left from Tamilnation and what he took out. I learned a valuable lesson from the effort. He took out Federico Mayor quote because it is secondary but he left the letter to Australian Federation of Tamils by an Australian minister in because it is primary. Hence Tamilnet quoating the Bishop is not only primary but is also WP:V] verfiable because his Tamil speech was attached to the news report. It may not be a neutral WP:NPOV source because most sources are biased including BBC (remember SL government complaint against it) but a WP:RS source for this article. Neutrality comes into play when we look at the overall article itself. Is it written from a neutral point of view or just gives one point of view only ? Each segment can balance each other out not that ecah sentence has to be neutral. Infact in the Bishops comments I included that he was accused by the other side of being pro rebel just to balance out the whole artcle. Your comments please. I want to solve this without needing eloborate mechanisms. Thanks RaveenS01:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
what we can and not use Tamilnet, Tamilcanadian and Tamilnation as sources for. What we can use is when they are the primary sources of information but if they are secondary sources for such notes as UN reports etc then it is better to use the primary source if it is available.
Yeah, I agree with you. Biased sources should use only when primary sources unavailable. But if any one use the independent sources to start the intro/article and biased sources as the allegation, I'm not agree with that. Most of the time even us (you know who I mean by us) try to use independent sources always than using the defense.lk.
Look at what Shuniker had left from Tamilnation and what he took out. I learned a valuable lesson from the effort. He took out Federico Mayor quote because it is secondary but he left the letter to Australian Federation of Tamils by an Australian minister in because it is primary.
Hmm yeah I saw it. Give him a Barnstar, I'll sign it too.
Hence Tamilnet quoating the Bishop is not only primary but is also WP:V] verfiable because his Tamil speech was attached to the news report. It may not be a neutral WP:NPOV source because most sources are biased including BBC (remember SL government complaint against it) but a WP:RS source for this article
Mmmm... I'm partially agree with you. Hope you have notice the Iwaszaki's argument with Sebastian. He noted that, Bishop's holy mouth is not a reliable source for him. I'm not insulting to the bishop but I like to agree with Iwazaki.
I'm fulfilled in what I do... I never thought that a lot of money or fine clothes — the finer things of life — would make you happy. My concept of happiness is to be filled in a spiritual sense. - Coretta Scott King (attributed)
Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won; you earn it and win it in every generation. - Coretta Scott King (attributed)
This IP address is currently assigned statically to North Haven High School in CT and is used as an extranet IP by all of the computers in the school. The acts of vandalism are random students messing around and this does not represent the interests of the rest of the student body nor of the school. Please take this into consideration when or if further action becomes necessary against this IP address. 13:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
I had to issue that warning because someone who access from this IP vandalized this page[2]. If these acts of vandalism are random students messing around, the officials of the school should take necessary actions to increase the discipline of students. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie13:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image tagging for Image:Flood East SL 2003 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Flood East SL 2003 1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Hey, You were hell-bent to delete my article's on the AFD discussion, but suddenly you have changed your mind and expanding my article.
I know the nature of Kandyan Sinhalese. Even my step-grand mother is a Kandyan Buddhist Sinhalese. But in wikipedia I have to argue a lot things even in the future. So you might feel still I am an uncomfortable person. Thanks for your editing. Rajsingam07:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes I was hell bent to delete your article because you are not notable in Sri Lanka. I would have certainly known about you if you were notable. Anyway, I will definitely help you maintain the quality of your article. By the way, how did you guess I am a Kandyan Sinhalese. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie08:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
O.K. you forget about the AFD issues. I went through sometime back your user profile their I have seen something about "Trinity College", that made me to guess, you might be a Kandyan Sinhalese, Am I right in my guessing?Rajsingam08:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image copyright problems
Hello. After encountering Image:Karuna.jpg's listing on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images, I have noticed many copyright problems with images that you have uploaded. You've been notified of many problems in the past, but your upload pattern has not changed. I must ask you now to stop uploading altogether until you have thoroughly read Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Fair use, and addressed problems with the images that you have already uploaded. I have only gone through a subset of your uploads, but here are some examples of the problems I saw:
Images tagged {{GFDL}} or {{GFDL}} that do not give any evidence that their copyright holders have released them under the GNU Free Documentation License. Many of them also do not name the copyright holders. Examples (this is not all of them):
Many images are inaccurately tagged with {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}}, when their source pages either say nothing of the kind or something more restrictive, such as "all rights reserved." Also, on some of these images, such as Image:ACSC crest.jpg, you have indicated that alterations to the images are forbidden. Unfortunately, as is noted in the copyright tag, images that do not allow derivative works (alterations) are not considered free content for the purposes of Wikipedia and are subject to speedy deletion.
Image:44597102 a884c9599f.jpg and Image:44599102 20c003dd82.jpg were uploaded with no information about their copyright holder except for a flickr url, which is either incorrect or no longer working. Not only does this not allow us to verify that Creative Commons by-sa is accurate, but by not attributing the copyright holder, we are in violation of the terms of the license.
Please take the time and go through your entire upload log and make sure each image has accurate information about its copyright holder and licensing. Images used under fair use should also include a detailed fair use rationale. If you have any questions at all, please do not hesitate to ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah now I understand that I made a huge mistake when tagging these pictures. So I'll change those into {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}} within today.
are taken from the Sri Lanka Army web site and on the bottom of the page it clearly state, Contents of this site are the sole property of Sri Lanka Army and any duplication in any media is liable for prosecution.Reproduction of these465 stories/data is possible provided its source is given its recognition. So I think the best way is to tag those pictures like this way, Image:ACSC crest.jpg. I took that picture from this site. Its a sub page of the Sri Lanka Army web site and I think the copyright status of the home page, will cover up its all the content, including its sub pages.
These pictures are take from "Army, Sri Lanka. (1st Edition - October 1999). "50 YEARS ON" - 1949-1999, Sri Lanka Army. ISBN995-8089-02-8 Parameter error in {{ISBN}}: checksum" book.
On the first page of that book says, The Content of this book is sole property of Sri Lanka Army and any duplication is liable for prosecution. Reproduction of the content is possible provided its source is given its recognition.
Most of the content of the current army web site are taken from this book, including history section, pictures, organization and the copyright status. Seriously even I can produce the evidence. So I'll take care them with {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}} tag and before that, I need your advices regarding that. Thank you and I'm awaiting for your reply --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie17:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lahiru. There's no need to copy you replies to my page; we can talk here. Don't rush to use {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}}. In my experience, it is rarely the best choice. On the first set, I have two concerns: first, that Sri Lankan Army property may be too restrictively copyrighted (despite casual statements that they may have on some of their websites or book), and second, that the photos may not all be owned by the army. Since you have access to a copy of the book, would you look to see if it has credits for the individual photographs (check captions, footnotes, the end of chapters, and around the beginning and end of the book).
For the second set, this page says only "all rights reserved". The message on the front page may apply, but like the one in the book, it is contradictory, both threatening prosecution for "duplication" and saying "reproduction" is "possible". If we can determine for sure that the images are usable for any purpose solely with attribution, then we should probably make a copyright template specifically them rather than using {{Attribution}}. At present, though, I'm skeptical. Depending on what you research turns up, perhaps we can ask for opinions at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. ×Meegs18:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Meegs, Selecting the right copyright tag for pics was really become a pest for me. I'm 1000 times agree with you to create a separate copyright template for these. Until that, may I replace those with the {{Attribution}}? Because I have to keep these without get delete until the creation of this separate copyright template. What do you think? --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie18:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We have a few days, but if you're antsy about deletion, make a clone of {{Attribution}} (call it Sri Lanka Army something) and use that. At least then, we'll have them all in one bucket for whatever may have to be done with them in the future. Did you check the book? ×Meegs19:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Meegs, how about this. {{CRSLATemp}}. Just now I create this. You can try on your self by typing {{subst:CRSLATemp|http://www.army.lk/acsc/Staff_Sports.htm}}.
Oh in middle of the acknowledgment says ....unfortunately the Army HQ, had either lost or destroyed all the archives that were available up to the time of moving from the old Army HQ building to the new Army HQ building. and ..The re-photography of the old pictures was done by Mr. Prasanna Hennayake. So I think we have to guess that these pictures are owned by the Army. What do you think? --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie19:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Take temp out of the title, and maybe just start with "#REDIRECT Template:Attribution" for now? There's no indication that all of the army's property is useable by attribution, is there? Better yet, unless you have any other leads, just post to Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Can I use... now and see if anyone else has an opinion (we have about four days before orphanbot starts pulling the images from articles). I'll make the query if you want, but my presentation will be much more negative than yours. Keep it short, quote the book, and mention that you've uploaded dozens of photos already. The question is about photos' ownership and the meaning of the book's imprecise and contradictory statement. ×Meegs20:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks for your help. Now my local time is 2.35AM and I have to wake-up at least 6.30AM. Meegs could you stat the query, and I'll be back on....about 10h and make my statement. Is that ok for you? Because as an administrator they will respect your recommendations than my once. Once we can finish this, it will be a great help to me because most of my edit are on Sri Lankan Military. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie20:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but this may just be a reprieve. I didn't tag all of the images, so make sure that you go through you whole upload log, and while you're there, make sure all of the images have accurate source info. ×Meegs05:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That response was not terribly helpful. Like Jeff, though, I still maintain that these images are not sufficiently free for our purposes. I doubt especially that the army would allow derivative works, a right that we require. I suspect the images will eventually be deleted, and I'll do it now if you like. It may be possible to use a small subset of them under fair use, but only when the photos themselves are the subject of commentary (I don't think this is the case for any of these), or else when they are absolutely integral to the article, and it is impossible to create or acquire a free image for the same purpose. ×Meegs20:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Meegs, I don't quite get what you say. But, those images are really essential for those articles. Since they are being used under fair use it can be used in that article only. I think for that purpose the images are sufficiently free. I have already scanned a lot of images for a couple of articles, but the work on those articles are paused due to this ongoing case. Is there anyway, I can make a public domain template according to the copyright law in Sri Lanka? If so that would be a great help not only for me but also for all the Sri Lankan editors in Wikipedia. I can easily help on this since I'm living in Sri Lanka. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie03:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Images on Wikipedia fall into two classes: free images (ones that allow every manner of use, reproduction and alteration —more info here) and unfree images (everything else), which must qualify for fair use (a U.S. legal concept) AND comply with Wikpedia's fair use policy. I was a bit indecisive earlier, but I'm now sure that there is insufficient evidence that the army's images fall into the first class. I would recommend that you migrate all of the images to {{fair use in}} (or {{Fairusein2}}) and write a customized a fair use rationale for each article that each image is used in. I won't hound you about this, but please just make sure than none of your uploads are mislabeled as GFDL or any other free license. It's best to guard against future scrutiny now, though, by providing the best rationales that you can. Best regards. ×Meegs00:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. As I said, you do not need to copy your messages to my talk page. I'm not able to edit every day, so you'll sometimes have to be patient with me. I'll continue watching this conversation for the immediate future. ×Meegs00:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can you help
Can you help me add and mark up some writing for the article on urban literature about a street literature & hip hop publisher? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyelambert (talk • contribs)
I took out vulgar paragraphs that someone else had left behind
Therefore I have no idea what you are refering to as vandalism. I was in the middle of editing them out, when I was kicked out. I logged back on and removed the disgusting vulgaraties. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.0.231.223 (talk) 02:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Yes I can see that you have removed all those vulgar paragraphs, but that is not exactly what I meant. I'm ready to take back the warning I gave you, if only you can explain this edit. Thank You. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie06:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
kosovo status to be determined
hi,
thank you for your message but kosovo is not part of serbia anymore, as you know its final status will be determined very soon but one thing is sure internationally kosovo does not belong to serbia anymore, for the sake of truth this must be clearly exposed in wikipedia which is a true source of information —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.66.24.62 (talk) 09:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
The article 2000 Sri Lanka Cyclone has just been nominated as a Featured Article. However, it does not look like any Sri Lankan editors have been involved in the creation or editing of the article. If you have the time, it would be quite helpful if you could look over the article and address the following:
Did the cyclone have a native name in Sinhala or Tamil?
Is there a corresponding article in either the Sinhala or Tamil Wikipedias?
Are there any POV issues due to a lack of local sources?
I am here to tell you about a few tools you may want to use. The first is the IRC recent changes channel #vandalism-en-wp. Since I started using it I have been able to make a lot more reverts. Alsoif you do not have a revert button already get one. Take a look at my monobook and copy the code. Have a nice week. --James, La gloria è a dio23:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Newyorkbrad's RfA
Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad19:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
would you
Well would you care to assist me in removing the weasel words and bias from that article? I personally think it holds no merit at the current time and seems to have been written by someone who went to the camp rather than a proprietor of the establishment. Perhaps we could downplay the advertising found in the article.
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007
The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
Hi, I moved the stuff about operation Niyathai Jaya from the STF article to a new article called Operation Niyathai Jaya. Can you check if everything is OK? And I don't have sinhalese fonts so can you add the name in sinhalese? Thanks --snowolfD4( talk / @ )17:18, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing there for me to comment on. I believe, the guy thinks I had some kind of agenda when I nominated the article for deletion. I thought it was just a poorly written, self-promoting advertisement that qualified for deletion. It was decided to keep the article and I'm OK with that. I have a pretty good batting average on WP:AFD, but I get it wrong sometimes:-) -Regards Nv8200ptalk17:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sri Lanka Barnstar
The Sri Lanka Reconciliation Barnstar
For your merits in Sri Lanka reconciliation[3][4][5], I herewith present you this Sri Lanka specific barnstar, which is the blossom of one of the world's most loved drinks.
You reverted my edit on the image. The blue line does not do what the text said it did as people agreed after lengthy discussion (see my edit summary). Why revert to a factually incorrect version? True, it was my second time to change that line, but the discussion turned out to follow my arguments.
Way to go. First re-inserting factually incorrect statements into an article and then not taking responsibility for fixing it. Quick. Better go tend your smily faces since that's what wikipedia is about. I really don't get this place. Seems more about ribbons, feel-good and recognition than about substance in the articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.224.84.113 (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Hmmm... I understand you. First create an account. Its simple, just click on here. It might help to other users to contact you and if you continue your changes on articles as an anonymous editor (IP user), there is a probability of understanding your outstanding edits as vandalism. If you want to learn more about the advantages of having an account, click on here. So my anonymous friend, after you create your new account please let me know it. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie17:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can I please see the "nonsense" that I supposedly added to this page, as I do not recall making any changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.194.13 (talk • contribs)
Hmm, maybe I was too mean to you. I didn't mean to make you cry! ;-) (why is there no smiley for a wink?) So I guess, your WP:IAR in the member list is what I deserved as a reply to my adding all those rules.
Seriously, though. I have seen many conflicts escalate with (at least) one side citing WP:IAR to justify even the most outrageus actions. (I should include some links here, but I hope you believe me anyhow.) Admittedly, in those escalations it seemed like the users who cited WP:IAR did not seem to have read it beyond its title. They just used it as a universal weapon agains all rules that stood in the way of their POV pushing, which is clearly wrong: The text says: "If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore them." Of course, what constitutes "improving Wikipedia" can not be decided by one side alone. So the POV pushers avoid an honest discussion of what's good for Wikipedia and just throw the magic formula WP:IAR at their opponents.
Therefore, I don't see how this rule can help deescalate in conflict situation. Have you really used this rule in a conflict situation? Do you have diffs from which I could learn? — Sebastian21:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!
This project was founded on January 24, 2007 as the first WikiProject specifically focused on conflict resolution. It was not needed anymore after the end of the Sri Lanka Civil war in 2009 and was shut down by a founding member in February 2015.
Its subpage /Sources continues to be used and is occasionally updated.
Readers interested in its history are invited to take a look at the following:
i appoligize for vandilizing the page. i wass not aware that it was accsessible to everyone that uses this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.244.228.100 (talk • contribs)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:LTTE barbarism in Kabitigollewa2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:LTTE barbarism in Kabitigollewa2.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot21:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned fair use image (Image:LTTE barbarism in Kabitigollewa.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:LTTE barbarism in Kabitigollewa.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot21:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Kent-farm2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Kent-farm2.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot21:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just created a new smiley: , which is supposed to show a wink - something I've been sorely missing here. I know it's far from perfect; its open eye is too big, and overall it doesn't look as nice as other smileys. It would be great if you could improve it. — Sebastian19:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know my IP address, I hope you can see, I just want to say, I never even went on the Coolio article let alone edit it. This has happened before, I have been falsely accused of editing an article about LEbonan and Israel war, I promise, please believe me, I have never been on the Coolio article at ALL! I dont know why this has happened, I am very shocked, please believe me, I dont lie. Hi its me again, I dont even know who Coolio is! WHy is this happening!? I love wikipedia, why would I vandilze it!? The only articles I view on wikipedia are anime and manga articles, and articles for research, I never view articles on popstars. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.234.97.81 (talk) 02:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]
i was blocked from wikipedia for something that i did not do, in our school, there are a lot of kids that do stupid stuff like that, but i was blocked from wikipedia for 2 weeks for something that some dumb kid did on his laptop
Sri Lanka Army
UN Special Envoy Allan Rock who has made these allegations were intern accused by the Sri Lankan government and several opposition political parties of having ties to LTTE (which is a banned terrorist organization in US and Europe as well as several other countries). How ever they have not made any formal accusations.[citation needed]
I removed this section because it is remaining in the Wikipedia for a long time without a citation. Give me the reason why it should stay.
I added a new section called Humanitarian Efforts for the pictures you wanted them to stay in this, which has no relevance with the human rights allegations of SL Army. I do not want edit wars, and be happy to make edits after your reply.
Thank you for remind me that. I added those pictures to gain some sort of balance on that section. In my pov, the neutrality of that section is horribly disputed and should turn into npov immediately, specially the Vakarei bombing. But unfortunately these days I'm bit busy and hope that you already understand that from my contributions. Feel free to add new info, but pls be kind to help me to maintain the neutrality :-) Why don't you login and do the changes Sechzehn? --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪Walkie-talkie16:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, although you find it POV , adding the pictures like the humanitarian pictures you added do not make any sense to me. ?It is like adding tsunami relief pictures by LTTE in the article Terrorist attacks attributed to the LTTE. Well think of it, and let's consider a new section for the section humanitarian efforts.
And about Mr. Rock, no credible evidence have been found that he had links to LTTE, except from the pro-GoSL sites. So let me make a kind of edit for that section and see how is it. --222.225.0.24400:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dude both articles were waiting to get into an edit war today or tomorrow hence I proactively merged them without any attributions. I created them both to balance Wikipedia but now I think we should simply have one article without any attribution. Those who want to expand them can write about the individual victims and let us know who may have killed them. Hope you like itRaveenS14:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Military History elections
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!
Thanks for uploading Image:WOll MBP..JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
I don't have any problems with Notable fallen members. I do have problems with War Heroes (and I think the Indian Army article is also POV). Why not let it out, as it is not included in British Army, United States Army or Israeli Defense Forces either? As is stated in WP:NPOV, actions should speak for themselves. So if your fallen members acted heroically, it should become apparent from their actions, not because of the title. Also take a look at World War II, which never mentions any war heroes at all. Errabee13:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If he does it again, If I were you, I will take him to ANI and get him banned. Infact I would have done already. Just my thoughts RaveenS16:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
However, they are currently missing information on their copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. They may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the images. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page. Please see my edit summary for more details. — Rebelguys2talk01:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, I hadn't read that discussion yet. But, from what he and I can tell, your Sri Lankan Army images definitely aren't free enough. As a result, we have no choice but to use them under a fair use rationale. Please see Wikipedia:Fair use. I don't really see the need for so many varied Sri Lanka Army templates, as you can further expound in fair use rationales and the like, though. I see you're pretty busy in real life right now, so you still have time to figure out the fair use tags in the next couple of days. Let me know if you need more time, and I'll untag them. — Rebelguys2talk02:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them.
Please don't remove {{ifd}} tags from images or nominations from the IfD pages. Feel free to leave comments for images that you feel should be kept and to make needed changes to the images, but it is up to an admin to close the nomination and decide whether the image should be kept or not. ~ BigrTex15:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Butting in here. I think it's OK to remove tags such as speedy ones for a missing license or source if they've been fixed. But when anything is listed at VFD - images for deletion, articles for deletion, etc., just leave a message and the closer of that nomination will take care of it.
I am trying to add to Larry Birkhead page about his soon to be daughters name this is not considered crystal ball because its widely known that the baby daughter is very soon to be renamed. Dannie Lynn Birkhead.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.239.208.20 (talk • contribs)
You are right brother..Honourable prabhakaran could go mad if he sees this article!! He is proud to be a terrorist and proud of all the mass killings he has done..So he could become outrageous if we dont mention his achievements on the article..And we can state every single murders,suicide bombing,mass killings carried out by the LTTE under Prabhas page,after all he is the Prime minister and the President and the sole Authority of Tamil Eelam..--Iwazaki04:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good for you that you corrected this deletion. — Sebastian 09:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Rfrisbietalk 22:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
. I never did think that you were disillusioned because of the edit wars on Sri Lankan conflict related topics. I have been here nearly 4 n half months and I always had to face such experiences. RaveenS has been here for 11 months and both of us and every other user have been facing such problems and none of them gave up editing. Why? That's because we all have an infinite hope that we regret to lose. But some people like Elalan, after they have been confirmed as sock puppets of another user, became a blatant vandal and I was accused as a sock puppeteer for some thing I didn't do and I was blocked for one week. Have you ever been accused for some thing you didn't do and punished? At least on your school days? I have been once and with this incidence the count was raised up to two. Ater that I was really disappointed and I thought to give up editing but I didn't give up my infinite hope. So there's no point in doing something like giving up editing for a simple matter. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 07:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
--♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 07:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
--♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 13:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
and I have to wake-up at least 6.30AM. Meegs could you stat the query, and I'll be back on....about 10h and make my statement. Is that ok for you? Because as an administrator they will respect your recommendations than my once.
. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 04:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
and those edits keep me encouraging to revert vandalism.
--♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 17:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
You stolen that from STF article. Ok Ok no worries just kidding 
. I have some more stuff that I already collected, I'll put those into the new article. Happy Editing!!! --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 17:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
. If you want to learn more about the advantages of having an account, click on here. So my anonymous friend, after you create your new account please let me know it. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 17:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
File:Cry-tpvgames.gif
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
, which is supposed to show a wink - something I've been sorely missing here. I know it's far from perfect; its open eye is too big, and overall it doesn't look as nice as other smileys. It would be great if you could improve it. — Sebastian 19:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
[7][8][9] I have done only these 3 edits from my recent 500. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ Walkie-talkie 03:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
