User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2017/August

Re: License for "Hawk Alfredson, Artist and Artwork"

Please see message and response on my talk page. LeeHan 20:56, 3 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leehanson100 (talk • contribs)

What about

Non free images such as movie posters.

Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finn_the_Human image also not free. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.140.162.164 (talk) 09:07, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Can you be more specific as to what image and what article you're referring to? -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:17, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I see that for Finn the Human page. That image is also not free. Music Video 123 (talk) 15:07, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

The image in that article is non-free content, but it seems to be being used in a manner which is acceptable per Wikipedia's non-free content policy and as explained in MOS:TV#Images. Comparing the way non-free images are being used in different articles can be difficult per WP:OTHERIMAGE since each individual use may not be exactly the same. Is there some other specific image or specific article you have in mind? Are User:Music Video 123/sandbox and this edit what you're referring to? If they are, then the reason the files's were linked was because your user sandbox is not an article; it's a page in your user namespace. Non-free content cannot be used in the user namespace per WP:NFCC#9 and WP:UP#Non-free files. I believe you asked this question before at User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2017/July#What do you mean non-free images and no uploading character artwork? and I've already answered it. Is something that you still do not uncerstand? -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:10, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I can do this: File:DaisyMarioParty8.png Music Video 123 (talk) 05:59, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure what you're asking. How and where do you want to use that file? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Gangarampur

Please change the page heading to city/town in West Bengal, India from Human settlement Thank you Nayanhalder57 (talk) 08:43, 10 August 2017 (UTC) Nayanhalder57 (talk) 08:43, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking, but the article Gangarampur is not protected, which means you should be able to make such a change yourself if you feel it is appropriate to do so. Just make sure you leave an edit sum explaining why. If another editor, by chance, reverts your change, start a discussion on the article's talk page as explained in WP:BRD. I don't know anything at all about the tpic, so I cannot really say whether such a change should be made or not. You may want to try asking for help at WT:INDIA since the editors in that WikiProject are likely to be more familar with the topic. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:27, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ArsenalLFC Twitter logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ArsenalLFC Twitter logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

OWSLA

Did you still need help improving the OWSLA page? To confirm, it needs more citations? It doesn't sound very bias to me. Let me know. I'm familiar with the electronic music scene.

CMCreator900 (talk) 22:21, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

You can just be bold and make any improvements you feel are needed; however, there were other editors besided myself who expressed concern about the article. Check the article's talk page and see what was posted. You can add your suggestions there if you want. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

My Sandbox

Hi there, I am new and saw you removed some edits on my Sandbox and wondered why? I believed sandboxes are a place for editors to experiment/work on projects before actual publishing on full proper pages? I saw you removed the poster from the infobox, but that very poster I got from the already existed page for the one I am hoping to update? I am confused on why you would edit on my sandbox, which I thought was for drafts and to 'play with' pages before final publishing on actual pages? Regards, Heimatchen (talk) 20:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Heimatchen. The licensing of each image you see on Wikipedia is determined by it copyright status and not every image file you see on Wikipedia is licensed the same. Some files are licensed as public domain or licensed under a free licensed suitable for Wikipedia and these are often collectively referred to as "free images". Other files are licensed as non-free content because of their copyright status and these file are commonly referred to as "non-free images". Non-free image use is highly restricted and each use of such an an image must satisfy Wikipedia's non-free image use policy. One of these restrictions is WP:NFCC#9, which says that non-free content can only be used in the article namespace. For this reason and as explained in WP:UP#Non-free files, non-free content such as File:Heimat poster.JPG cannot be used on your user page or any of your user subpages like your sandbox. Perhaps you did not notice the edit sum I left here, or maybe you did notice but just did not understand it or click on the links it included. This post hopefully amkes things a little clearer. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask as WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC.

Finally, you are correct in that user sandboxes are places where you can work on improvements, etc. for articles, but you should be aware of WP:UP#OWN. Pretty much any page can techincally be edited by anyone at anytime, but most experienced editors will leave user pages, etc. alone unless there is a problem which needs addressing. You should also be aware of WP:CWW, particularly when large blocks of copying-and-pasting content from the article namespace into your sandbox. Wikipedia's licensing requires that you at least attribute where the content was taken from unless it is one of the cases described in WP:NOATT. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:30, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. That all makes sense now. Thank you for explaining. I've looked at the links and understand slightly more too. Still have more to learn, but hopefully I can continue to edit using my sandbox until I am satisfied and hope to include in actual article, without further problems. It is all a lot to take in, but I am passionate about this one film series and really want to expand/improve it than the current article. Regards, Heimatchen (talk) 23:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

It appears you have edited notable alumni on Yarra Valley Grammar page.

This school produces far more than footballers as was evident prior to your edi. Frankly I find your edit disrespectful to the notable alumni previously listed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:5493:500:6dd9:c096:7426:8bf8 (talk) 16:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)‎

Jim1138 has already responded to you at User talk:2001:8003:5493:500:6dd9:c096:7426:8bf8#Lists of people, so I will add a comment there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:21, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Non-free use rationale

Hello, Marchjuly.

I have seen your message and i have added a non-free use rationale on the file's description. I am not a brand new user, but I am not experienced. I have a couple things to ask.

1. Do I need to create another non-free rationale every time I use the file?

2. Will people(probably admins) look at the rationale and If they find it not meeting the criteria, will they delete it?

Please answer this ASAP, and I will be very happy.

Thanks, ST15RM 12:01, 17 August 2017 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by ST15RM (talk • contribs) 12:01, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi ST15RMwikipedia. Each use of a non-free file is required to be provided with a separate specific non-free use rationale per WP:NFCC#10c, so yes a new rationale needs to be provided each time you use the file. However, the rationale needs to satisfy all ten of the non-free content criteria for each use, so simply adding a rationale is no guarantee that the way the files is being used complies with with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. A rationale just prevents the file from being nominated for speedy deletion per WP:F6; the file may still be deleted for other reasons. For example, File:Story remix screenshot in Windows10.png has a rationale, but it is not a valid rationale because it does not satisfy WP:NFCC#7. Each non-free file must be used in at least one article, and those which aren't may be speedily deleted per WP:F5. Any file which falls under any of the things listed in WP:FCSD may be nominated for speedy deletion by any editor. These files are then reviewed by an administrator who then will decide what to do. Sometimes the reviewing adminstrator will delete the file because it clearly violates relevant Wikipedia policy: other times, the adminstrator may suggest further discussion at WP:FFD because the file's problems are not as clear cut and may require a community consensus to delete. In this case, WP:F5 is a clear violation, so the file will certainly be deleted in about a week unless it is added to an article. Most likely within the next day or so, it will be tagged with Template:Orfud by either a human reviewer or a bot, and you should receive a notification of this on your user talk page. The file can only be used in the article mainspace per WP:NFCC#9, so adding it to your sandbox is not acceptable. If the file is deleted, do not panic. Deleted files are not gone forever; they are only hidden from public view. So, once your draft has been upgraded to an article, contact the administrator who deleted the file or ask for help at WP:REFUND. The file will likely be restored as long as its use complies with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy.

Now some general things.

1. There appears to be something wrong with your signature. Are you signing your posts as explained in WP:TILDE? All signatures are required to have a link to either a userpage or a user talk page per WP:SIGLINK, but yours doesn't for some reason. Go to your "Preferences" page (the link is up at the top of your browser next to "Sandbox") and check the signature section. Make sure you do not have the box for "Treat the above as wiki markup" checked. If that's not the issue, ask for help at WP:VP/T or WP:HD.
2. Try and remember that all editors are volunteers who sometimes get busy. So, even politely asking for an answer ASAP may rub some people the wrong way. No one is obligated to repsond to a post so sometimes it may take a bit of time until some one does.

If you have any more specific questions about non-free files or file licensing, feel free to ask them at WT:NFCC or WP:MCQ. There are many more editors watching those pages than there are watching my talk page, so you have a better chance of getting a quicker response. If you have a general questions about files or editing in general, you can try asking for help at The Teahouse. Teahouse hosts tend to be pretty exerienced editors who know lots of things about Wikipedia and there are always hosts there answering questions. Good luck. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:58, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Admiralty and Navy Board Flags

Hi the flags we uploaded as copyright free by the author as their own work which is factually correct am sure you checked the file history? I have left numerous messages regarding this on all the relevant talk pages concerning these images, which should never have been changed from a free PD image released to WP to a non content free image had people done their homework correctly and cross checked the images from CRW flags next to the up-loaded versions side by side using an editing program before assuming it was copyrighted somewhere else. I have left a message with the administrator who changed it then I'll wait hear from them you also need to be open to the fact this is a mistake and if you have an editing program combine I recommend that you place both images next to each other then you will clearly see they are not the same image.--Navops47 (talk) 11:56, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Just noticed you have replied at NFCC apologies for jumping the gun a bit.--Navops47 (talk) 11:59, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Image despute reason

Hi,

Thanks for your concern regarding the images. Please note that the reason why I feel that those two images must be included in the article as I feel that it acts as a core function for the purpose of readability and better enhancement per WP:Manual of style. The issue is currently a hot topic (medias & in the social medias) in the southern state of Kerala. However, although I contributed a lot for the purpose of maintaining the issue in a neutral way, I personally do not have any particular interest in this subject as I am sick of editing this subject. I tried making a neutral contribution regarding this case as it attracted vandalism from people, especially the actors fans. I also suggest you to look into 9/11 article which has many such images to boost the readability. Thank you & have a great day. Wikieditorhja (talk) 08:55, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a newspaper and its purpose is not to cover hot topics just because they are hot topics. Moreover, trying to justify the non-free use of an image by comparing it to other images in other articles is almost always not helpful per WP:OTHERIMAGE. All of the image files in the 9/11 article are freely licensed or public domain images which are not subject to Wikipedia's non-free content use policy so trying to compare the image use of the two articles is like trying to compare an apple to an orange. The two non-free images in Dileep (actor) clearly are not allowed per WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8 in my opinion and their use may also be problematic per WP:BLPCRIME and WP:MUG. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:51, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Well, if an article text well described about the arrest & bails court proceedings, how can you say merely adding an 'image' is problematic per BLP:Crime? If you look at the 9/11 images, some are not even relevant with the topic but it well describe the readability in a readers prospective of view. While saying Wikipedia:Ignore all rules, policies and guidelines are developed by the community to describe best practices, anyone can make the policies under their own way or applying. Deleting images in a non-dispute article is more less offering someone (reader) rotten orange or apple, or a house without its roof. I have nothing more to comment about this matter however, I wish the decision of deleting those images needs to be done after having a proper consensus and must be done by an administrator, or else I will appeal. Wikieditorhja (talk) 12:25, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Once again, bringing up the 9/11 article is pointless because none of the images used in that article are subject to the same policy as the two files you uploaded. Also, WP:NFCCP is a policy developed and based upon a Wikimedia Foundation resolution so it is not really the same as other policies developed by the community. Trying to use IAR as a justification for non-free image use is never a good idea per bullet point #7 in WP:IAR?#What "Ignore all rules" does not mean because NFCCP deals with the use of copyrighted content, which is one of Wikipedia's more important policies, and trying to justify a WP:COPYVIO or NFCCP violation (which is considered to be a copyright violation) by arguing IAR is simply a going to be a non-starter.

Files are like articles in that any editor can nominate a file for deletion, but only an administrator can actually delete the file. Administrators review speedy deletion templates before deciding what to do; the reviewing adminsitrator will see all of the comments which have been made and make a decision based upon relevant policy. If the file or files are deleted, you can discuss any concerns you may have with the deleting administrator if you like.

Now, it's really not a good idea to try and conitnue discussing this on multiple pages since it doing so will lead to a lot of unnecessary repetition and make it harder for others to follow along. So, I suggest using File talk:Dileep produced before the magistrate court which sent him to judicial custody.jpg for any further discussion. If that's agreeable to you, I will move the last two comments made her to that page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

"it's really not a good idea to try and conitnue discussing this on multiple pages". No. you have added the deletion templates on two files which I challenged. Please do not make the discussion confusing. 9/11 you did not get my points, just leave it. It looks like you are the one who is commenting on multiple places (here & the other files talk page, not me) Please find my reply at the the image talk file now onwards. Wikieditorhja (talk) 21:59, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

What is spam?

If I linking to external sites is spam? Music Video 123 (talk) 11:32, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

"Spam" is defined as WP:SPAM on Wikipedia. If any of the websites you want to link to are similar to the ones described in WP:ELNO, then you probably should not add a link to them. If any of the websites you want to link to are similar to the ones described in WP:ELNEVER or WP:COPYLINK, you definitely should not add a link to them. That leaves WP:ELMAYBE and WP:ELYES as websites that you can probably add links to. If someone removes them, follow WP:BRD and try and find out why. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:57, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Such some unwanted sites? Music Video 123 (talk) 07:52, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Non free file use

Why did you edit the pictures you kinky rigid face bastard? The Autobahn Police Simulator picture was uploaded by mine. I adopted those pictures to show a preview on the game I play for people who don't know the game. Explain yourself pompous jerk! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TravisGTAGamer (talk • contribs) 04:17, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

@TravisGTAGamer: Please see the message I left you on your user talk page. Also, pe be advised of WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL and just don't go around insulting othjer editors. I also suggest taking a look at WP:COPY as well. Uploading an image does not make you the copyright holder of the image unless you are the original creator of the underlying work.

Also, please remember to sign your talk page posts. The easiest way to do so is explained in WP:TILDE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:25, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Maybe you don't have permission?

EDIT: Please don't insult my friend like that! Music Video 123 (talk) 11:34, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Music Video 123. While I appreciate the gesture and think your intentions were good, please do not edit another editor's post like you did, OK? People sometimes get frustrated and as a result may post an angry sounding message, but you shouldn't refactor what they've posted except in certain specific cases as explained in WP:TPO. A lot of new users, especially, are just unfamiliar with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines, so as more experienced editors we should try to avoid WP:BITE, WP:KEEPCOOL, and let the situation settle down whenever possible. It's really only when there is a pattern of uncivil and disruptive behavior, etc. that a stronger response might be necessary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:10, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Fair use on Neil Shawcross

You have left a message on my talk page challenging a non-free image I added to illustrate the work of the artist Neil Shawcross. I object to this. It is impossible to illustrate the work of a living artist without using work that is in copyright, and I left a non-free-use rationale to that effect. I also object, very strongly, to the lazy demand that I find a replacement.

I have no objection to my work being replaced by better work, that's the nature of Wikipedia. What I do object to is my work being attacked for no good reason. The image I provided illustrates the work of the artist, it's a small, low-resolution portion of a work, a valid non-free use rationale was provided, copyright is acknowledged and a link to the source provided. I did the work, and I did it in compliance with Wikipedia policy.

I have disputed your free-use challenge, but under protest. If you are aware of a better alternative, do the work yourself, don't yank my chain because I've shown willing before. If you think a better alternative is available, you should be able to find it yourself. If there are no better alternatives available and the existing image complies with policy, then leave it alone - and leave me alone. --Nicknack009 (talk) 09:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The file is being used in the main infobox of a still living individual. The main infobox image of an article is used for identification of the subject of the article, so using a non-free image of a painting in such a way would only make sense if the painting is the subject of the article, which is not the case at all here. The artist is still living, and in principle a freely licensed image is only allowed for identification of an individual in such cases per WP:NFCC#1. I looked at the article and I couldn't find any mention of the work at all anywhere all, so there's no real place where the image could be curently used which satisfies WP:NFCC#8. If you want to add such content to the article with supporting sources and then move the image to that part of the article, feel free to do so. If you're unable to do that, you shouldn't expect others to do it for you. As explained in WP:NFCCE, it is the burden of those wanting to use non-free content in certain way to justify that particular use and show how it meets all ten non-free content criterion. Adding a non-free use rationale is only one part of one of those criteria, and adding rationale does not mean its automatically valid per WP:JUSTONE.

Finally, nobody was attacking you so try and assume good faith and assume others are here as well. The notification template is just a standard template added to user talk pages, so there's no need to view it as anything other than it is. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Again, someone accuses me of expecting me to do their work for them, when the situation is exactly the opposite. I DO NOT WORK FOR YOU. If you want to improve the article, please do. But stop demanding I do it. --Nicknack009 (talk) 23:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I suggest you read the replies others have left for you at WP:MCQ because apparently I am not the only one who feels the non-free use of that particular file is not properly justified. In fact, another editor actually went an removed the file from the article for the same reasons I gave when I tagged the file with {{rfu}}. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

You, and everyone else, seem to be working on the assumption this is an image I have just uploaded with no regard to policy. The message you left might be applicable, if unnecessarily accusatory and confrontational, if that was the case. But it's not. I uploaded the image TEN YEARS AGO, and I did my best to ensure it complied with policy then. Ten years later, on an open wiki that anyone can edit, I do not consider I have any responsibility for it any more. Most statutes of limitations are shorter than that. So stop making unwarranted demands of me. --Nicknack009 (talk) 00:33, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

No one is making demands of you. You were simply notified as a courtesy because you uploaded the file. If you wish to do nothing, then do nothing. You disputed the rfu tag, so you do not have to do anything more and can just leave it up to the reviewing admin to review. WP:NFCCE places the burden for justifying non-free use upon those wishing to use a non-free file in a particular way in the same manner that WP:BURDEN places the burden for providing citations to reliable sources on those adding unsourced content to an article. You can, of course, choose to do nothing in either case if you wish. Trying to argue WP:YOUGOFIRST to justify non-free use, however, is never a good idea.

Being uploaded a long time ago is no more a valid justification of non-free content use per WP:NOBODYCOMPLAINED any more than WP:LONGTIME is a valid justification for keeping an article nominated/tagged for deletion. The relevant policy with respect to non-free content use is WP:NFCCP as currently written, not as written so many years ago. If, however, you feel the policy should be changed to make allowances for files uploaded so many years ago (i.e., a "grandfather clause"), then you should suggest such a thing at WT:NFCC and see if you can establish a consensus.

You can simply remove any notifications added to your user talk page per WP:OWNTALK since doing so is considered to be a indication that you have read the notification and understand it. If you don't want such notifications posted, then perhaps you should add something to top of the "edit" window of your user talk page letting others know that you prefer not to have such notifications added. In some cases, however, notifying someone is not really an option and is required (for example, WP:AN and WP:AFD), but it other cases its simply does as a courtesy.-- Marchjuly (talk) 01:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)