User talk:MarchHare

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on [[User talk:{{{1}}}|my talk page]]. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!--Cute 1 4 u 23:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Confederate Battle-Boscobel (8-02-2003).jpg

This image was tagged as fair use, and non-free content cannot be used on your User page per Wikipedia non-free content criteria policy item 9. "Non-free content is only allowed in articles." The image would also not be allowed to be put in an article unless it did not violate any of the other non-free content criteria. -Regards Nv8200p talk 16:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you create the image or are you the copyright holder of the image? If not, then the image is non-free (to use on Wikipedia) unless you get written permission from the copyright holder to release under the GFDL or an appropriate Creative Commons license. If you are the copyright holder, then the image needs to be tagged as GFDL and/or Creative Commons. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Free licenses for the right tag to use. -Nv8200p talk 17:15, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am taking your response to mean that whoever took the image (a family member or friend perhaps) will grant you their permission to release under the GFDL. It sounds like you are in the image, so someone else probably took it. I tried to restore the image but it was too long ago. The text is there but no image. You will have to re-upload the image. Be sure to document the image well and put a an appropriate copyright tag on the image description page or the image may be nominated for deletion again. Regards -Nv8200p talk 17:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may have possession of the image, but the copyright holder is usually considered to be the person (usually called the author) who created the image, whether it was taken with equipment you own or not, unless that person was your employee or the image was a work for hire. I am not going to challenge the image but there may be people that will. -Nv8200p talk 20:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This Copyright Office circular indicates whoever sets the work into a tangible form is the copyright holder no matter who owns the equipment, unless there is a specific written agreement that it is a work for hire. -Nv8200p talk 21:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The kid at the 1 hour photo is just doing a utilitarian process. To claim copyright, there must be a creative element. Giving you the camera is not a surrender of copyright anymore then you giving prints of pictures you might have taken to someone else whether that is the only copy in existence or not. Creative works no longer have to be registered or published to receive copyright. Copyright is now by default since about 1976. Just be aware of these things and how you describe and tag the image when you upload it again. The odds of anything on Wikipedia ever going to court for copyright infringement or astronomically small, I believe, but that does not stop editors from challenging images they think don't have the proper pedigree. It happens all the time here and the image could be deleted again. Good luck with it. -Nv8200p talk 00:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photon bubble

A tag has been placed on Photon bubble, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. PamD (talk) 16:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

renaming your account

hi there!

this is de:user:JD talking. yes, we got the same nicknames in different wikipedia projects. :-)

i'm an admin at de.wikipedia.org and have been pretty active since about 4.5 years now without any pause. since single user login was activated a few months ago it has been a little problem for me because of your account i couldn't merge all my accounts into one. therefore, i have to log out in de.wp everytime, get back on here, log in as "JD_de", do my work in en.wikipedia, log out again, get back on de.wikipedia and log in again, for example. the web cookies can't handle it better.

so my question is: is there any possibility that you agree on changing your username, so i could use the "user:JD" identity for my work in all wikimedia projects? when the rename has been completed, your account will have been renamed, and any contributions you have made will be reattributed to your new account as a background process. your account preferences, watchlist contents, password, etc. will all be preserved, and your user and user talk pages will have been moved to the new name.

greetings, --JD de {æ} 17:27, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your reply. i'm waiting eagerly for your decision. ;-)

i wish you happy holidays, --JD de {æ} 19:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks so much, again. --JD de {æ} 23:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]