User talk:Napoleon 100
Welcome
[edit]
|
Replaceable fair use File:Ekalavya, the tribal prince, cuts off his thumb.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Ekalavya, the tribal prince, cuts off his thumb.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the media description page and edit it to add
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:16, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
About Khan Jahan II
[edit]Hi Napoleon 100, and again welcome to Wikipedia.
I don't understand what you are doing with that article. You started it, then tagged it as a WP:COPYVIO of the online Encyclopedia Britannica article. It is entirely copied and pasted from that source. While it would appear to be a valid article topic, this appears to me self-defeating. You could have written the article in your own words, using the EB article as a source.
Would you like some help? I'm online at the moment. Any time you need help you can add the {{helpme}} template to your talk page (which is this page you are reading now) and one of your fellow Wikipedians will help you out.
--Shirt58 (talk) 09:54, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
June 2012
[edit]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Phoenicia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. and other articles, where an image of Napoleon was clearly not appropriate. Dougweller (talk) 18:19, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- Doug, from what I saw, the images were indeed very appropriate to their articles, but they were misnamed for some reason, they were also marked for move to a more appropriate name. So I'm not sure it is a case of vandalism. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 19:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- You may be right, but they didn't improve the articles. Maybe after the move. And Napoleon100, it does seem odd that the captions all mentioned Napoleon in articles where Napoleon wasn't relevant. Dougweller (talk) 21:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, no, the captions did not mention Napoleon, it was only the file titles themselves. I haven't looked in depth, but AGF, I would guess that he used some semi-automated program to upload a long series of historical illustrationss, where the first one was of Napoleon, and then perhaps the rest inadvertently picked up the same file title as the first, but numbered # 2, 3, 4 etc. Then he tagged them all to be moved to the proper titles. The only one I really looked at was the pic added to Assyria which I feel did improve the article, if only it had a more appropriate file title. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 22:14, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, yes, got that backwards, captions made sense, image title didn't. You may be right about the cause. Dougweller (talk) 15:34, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, no, the captions did not mention Napoleon, it was only the file titles themselves. I haven't looked in depth, but AGF, I would guess that he used some semi-automated program to upload a long series of historical illustrationss, where the first one was of Napoleon, and then perhaps the rest inadvertently picked up the same file title as the first, but numbered # 2, 3, 4 etc. Then he tagged them all to be moved to the proper titles. The only one I really looked at was the pic added to Assyria which I feel did improve the article, if only it had a more appropriate file title. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 22:14, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
- You may be right, but they didn't improve the articles. Maybe after the move. And Napoleon100, it does seem odd that the captions all mentioned Napoleon in articles where Napoleon wasn't relevant. Dougweller (talk) 21:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
About your Image Guru Gobind
[edit]Nepoleon 100 i have not removed your image but placed where it should be.You image was regarding Guru Hargovind ji,the sixth sikh guru.That's why i moved this image from article Guru Gobind Singh to Guru Har Gobind.See Article Guru_Hargobind This image has nothing to do with Guru Gobind Singh.I would say actually title of your image is wrong because this image is related with Guru Har Gobind not with Guru Gobind Singh.If u can change title,plz change.So brother do not mind and understand the fact.Thanx for uploading this photo. Shemaroo (talk) 18:34, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 28
[edit]Hi. When you recently edited Pradyumna, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dwaraka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:48, 28 June 2012 (UTC)