Jump to content

User talk:Polly/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MMS Images

[edit]

Hi Polly, all of the images here are property of the Metropolitan Mountaineering Society (which I am a member of), and I am currently updating it and retagging it with the {{BSD}} tag since it belongs to us.

After I retag all of the images, could I revert it to the last good version? I am currently doing a cleanup of the article.

Thanks, Jojoqvenx (talk) 03:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I am not the author of the page, but I do know the author. I am going to clean it up and make it as objective as possible. Jojoqvenx (talk) 03:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes a rewrite would be needed to make it encyclopedic in tone and less like a MySpace page. Polly (Parrot) 03:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
THanks, please feel free to check the article every now and then, your comments and advice will be very much appreciated. Jojoqvenx (talk) 03:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good faith tag notices

[edit]

Hi, you added a speedy deletion tag to an image I uploaded using my public terminal account at User:UKIPSO which is a legitimate use of a secondary account. That account is labelled up clearly, and the talk page redirects to my own primary account talk page. However, you placed a good faith notice following the CSD tagging, but did so on the redirect talk page. Content won't show up that way. As I say, I'm treating this with good faith but in future could you please make sure that when you notify users of your tagging that you do so where it will be visible and not on redirect pages, otherwise they (and others) are unlikely to pick it up. Cheers. ColdmachineTalk 07:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image talk:Wrentit.jpg

[edit]

Hi, just to let you know that there is a discussion regarding your tagging of the image going on there- if this is of interest to you, replying there would be the best bet. On another note, keep up the good work on the void Flickr tagging- that really is a job that needs to be done. J Milburn (talk) 18:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC) == File:332nd Co D Training 1942 Jul 4.jpg I would have gladly looked at the image and changed the description but I did not log into wikipedia for a cpuple weeks and it is already deleted. Too bad that 'speedy deletion' becomes censorship by default. I cannot see the duplication you are referring to. 10:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Project

[edit]

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yvo De Boer pic has CC 2.0

[edit]

I think there has been a misunderstanding. Image:Yvo de Boer.jpg is from flickr. See here[1]

It has a CC Attribution 2.0 Generic license.


I don't understand why you are trying to delete it. Custodiet ipsos custodes talk 18:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DEAR POLLY, THE PICTURE I WANTED TO UPLOAD IS OF MS MAMATA BANERJEE WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE INDIAN PARLIMENT. I HAVE TAKEN THE PICTURES FROM THE WEBSITE OF HER PARTY AND FROM A CD SHE HAD GIVEN ME. SHE HERSELF HAS ASKED ME TO UPLOAD THE PICTURE. CAN YOU TELL ME HOW I CAN UPLOAD IT —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baidyanath ghosh (talk • contribs) 14:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I see you've already uploaded it, it should be OK as is, but to be on the safe side you could forward the permission you received to permissions-commons AT wikimedia DOT org and add the OTRS ticket number you get to the image page. Polly (Parrot) 18:27, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then follow the rest of the procedure detailed here. Polly (Parrot) 21:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image crad1.gif

[edit]

What goes? I am quite sure that that image I uploaded was valid, but it was gone, bang, and I cannot see what the reason was, cannot see the original image page. --Dumarest (talk) 21:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images for Marilou, Marie-Mai, Andree Watters, Marie-Elaine Thibert and Stephanie Lapointe

[edit]

Hum! I was following the same way then Loose (Nelly Furtado album) and also Eva Avila's Somewhere Else album for the album tags and licenses, etc, etc. and for Loose and Somewhere Else and it seems okay so I don't see why for the four Francophone albums there is an issue. JForget 23:27, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I may just simply move some of the cover further up the text since it says it is unacceptable in the discography section but no mention of being unacceptable elsewhere. Maybe not all images will be saved but at least I will save some of them - at the worst create an article. Those albums are very notable in Quebec, so they should deserve an article for most of them. --JForget 23:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked the WikiProject for a hand on create article on francophone albums for artists such as Garou, Marie-Mai, Eric Lapointe, etc as those would be notable because of the Quebec factor. Very popular artists in which their albums had singles that topped charts there. For now I will try to salvage those image on including them in the text. If there is no problems of having on the Eva Avila, then I don't see a problem with the others--JForget 00:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you'll find a lot of people would say that the image in Eva Avila goes against the NFC criteria. The main reason being it's the only image on a BLP and it's non-free, this is oft seen as a breach. NFC is worded in such a way as to cause maximum consternation, and engenders in the individual reading it a feeling of intense bewilderment. In my darker moments I sometimes think this might be deliberate, but that really wouldn't be assuming good faith. Indeed faith may be all that sustains one as you navigate your way through this perilous policy of pitiless pitfalls. Good luck. Polly (Parrot) 00:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging

[edit]

Why are you tagging images like this one as missing rationales? If you dispute their licensing, we have processes for that - Possibly Unfree Images is a good place to start - but please don't tag free images as needing rationales. That category backs up enough every time a bot runs through uploads. (ESkog)(Talk) 14:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Trapped underground.jpg

[edit]

Directly below the image on the source page is a link to CC 2.5 Generic; what the rest of the blog is licensed as is irrelevent. On another note, I misread your edit summaries. I'm fairly certain this image is free. J Milburn (talk) 18:16, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Velvett Fogg

[edit]

Hi Polly,

Thanks for advising me about the images. I am unsure what to do now, as the photos of the album and band are my own. I am the songwriter for the band and thought it would be useful, to Wikipeda, to expand on the stub.

These images are now 40 years old, and as such, I would have thought be in public domain.

However I stand by your decision on the subject,

Best Wishes,

Keith Law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Velvettfogg (talk • contribs) 18:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lee photo

[edit]

Lee photo

[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You are welcome to try and find a free official photo of Lee. However, it is unlikely that there would be an official campaign photo that is free, as stated in the rationale. The purpose of the infobox is not to find just any photo, but an official photo–the encyclopedic value is derived from it being an official photo. I used the proper tag per WP:Publicity Photos (which is no longer active, I know) but the end result would be adding {{Withpermission}} keeping the same tag that is already there. Seeing as te candidate's campaign initially created the article as spam and I rescued it, I would say its implied that they want the photo there. If you would like to contact the campaign, or can find a suitable replacement, please let me know, as we do not want to not want or need to destroy content without a suitable replacment. MrPrada (talk) 23:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry but if you want the photo to remain then you would need to get permission from the copyright holder. Current policy is only to allow non-free images on BLP's in exceptional circumstances. Polly (Parrot) 23:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Now I noticed you've tagged the Paterson and O'Byrne photo. Are you actually reading the rationale, or just tagging when you notice a non-free imagine in a BLP? Since Paterson is no longer a State Senator, there is never going to be a free equivalent of that image in the Senate chambers. MrPrada (talk) 23:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • But is the image crucial, does it convey anything text cannot? Polly (Parrot) 23:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, as is indicated in the rationale. Although the policy usually considers fair use images of living people that merely show what they look like to be replaceable by free-licensed images and unsuitable for the project, a rationale can be provided proving that the image provides information beyond simple identification and shows that this image is difficult to replace by a free-licensed equivalent. I believe the rationale I gave in the Paterson & O'Byrne photo adequately addresses those requirements. MrPrada (talk) 23:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • But that argument could be made for any number of non-free images, that's the trouble with the WP:NFC criteria, far too open to interpretation. Polly (Parrot) 00:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agreed, however I think the interpretation for the Paterson/O'Byrne photo would lend towards inclusion (I am not addressing the Lee photo any further because I am positive they will release the photo themselves). A photo from a press agency (e.g. AP) is generally non permissible, unless the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article, which it is (the 2nd paragraph in the political career section). So I'm still not seeing a speedy here. Perhaps you can take it to IFD and see what the consensus is? Several other non-free photos have been zapped out of the Paterson article, at least three, but this one has survived. To that means there is an implied consensus to keep, but perhaps other editors will disagree, which would be a shame since you're not going to get a Senate antechamber of the two of them photo that illustrated their closeness again (although eventually someone may or may not may snap the two of them together in public). MrPrada (talk) 00:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I take your point that the image of these two together has a significance and its use on the Paterson article is offset by the free images. Though I think its use on the O'Byrne article is far shakier as both images there are non-free and it's being used as the main image in the infobox. Polly (Parrot) 00:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, I see what you mean with regard to the infobox, although it is a political infobox for his role as Secretary to the Governor, so I felt it was appropriate. He is not easy to get a photo of (Although he has edited the article himself), but I suppose it eventually could be replaced. However I'm still not convinced that there is a policy for CSD on that image. I also fired off an e-mail to the Lee campaign to see if they will give permission to use the other photo. MrPrada (talk) 00:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You could try an email to O'Byrne and see if he'll release a free image, then even if he declines at least you can state you tried. This would then at least strengthen your case for keeping the image in his article. Polly (Parrot) 00:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi, the image is self-made (as I detail on the image page): I shot it myself. What else do I need to add to satisfy WP's copyright mavens? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

ditto. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

double ditto. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Triple ditto. Slapping these warnings on my page, when it's clear that these are self-made images, doesn't exactly help me much. I await your response. (One response would be fine, rather than the quadruplicate.) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • Which are the "relevant" ones? Can I add {{Attribution}}, for instance?

Tenrikyo

[edit]

Hi there, I undid your edit to this page. I wasn't sure if you tagged the right image, and if you did how it fit the CSD criteria. If that was the image you intended to tag, there's another one on that article uploaded by the same user. But I think you should better explain your reasoning for having them removed. Louis Waweru  Talk  21:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The message on the article page is auto generated by Twinkle when the image is tagged, the image uploader has now added the licensing so all is well. Polly (Parrot) 21:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you for the reply. Louis Waweru  Talk  21:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image issue

[edit]

I am sorting this now, I uploaded the image and then got engrossed in something, forgetting about the article. Thanks for the reminder.

Fair Use

[edit]

I hope that I have provided an appropriate rationale for the image you commented on. I was not sure if the image is in fact not free, but I decided to err on the side of caution. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Connie matthew (talk • contribs) 22:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image reducing

[edit]

Hi, Polly. My watchlist has just been bombarded by images of mine that you have reduced. First: thank you. Second: An explanation: Either my imaging skills, or my imaging software, or both are very crappy, and when I size an image down to Wiki-standards, the image looks... very crappy. So, I hope you don't mind if I continue uploading these larger images. Should I just tag them for reduction while uploading? Dekkappai (talk) 23:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm just tagging them for reduction, not reducing them, somebody else can do that if they so wish. The good old NFC says such images should be low resolution, now what is low resolution for a movie poster? Damned if I know. Polly (Parrot) 23:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah, right, I see you're just tagging. I'll just include the tag in my uploads for now, especially my own scans which tend to be large, but not bandwidth-destroying... Thanks again. Cheers! Dekkappai (talk) 23:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Polly

[edit]

Have you been the editor removing my changes on Masiela Lusha's article? Please know, I have no intention on making your job any more difficult, and haven't been vandalizing or offering destructive behavior.

I hope you can understand my frustration because I represent her as my client and had only intended to upgrade your information about her for her fans. A one stop deal so to speak.

There are a few errors such as her once living in Georgia. That is incorrect. She lived in Michigan before LA, and a few other additions that I had sited from her IMDB.com and her official website MasielaLusha.com

I don't believe you will meet anyone as interlaced in her career as I am, and I would very much like it if we work together, as opposed to against.


Please advise.

Aaronweinhaus (talk) 01:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Weinhaus

Masiela Lusha

[edit]

I understand, although I have the rights to the image and have worked on it myself. What do you suggest I do in order to have it replace the generic silhouette girl who's image helps no one.

Please advise,

Aaron

Aaronweinhaus (talk) 16:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mallu Magalhães

[edit]

Hi Polly;
I've made some comments in the talk page. Take a look, please. Cheers (Caiaffa (talk) 00:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Images

[edit]

I uploaded images for the SpongeBob Characters...

Are this images ok?

This images are from SpongePedia (screen shots of SpongeBob episodes) which is also a wiki...

IMAGES: Image:Patrick.jpg Image:SpongeBob.jpg

Beatlesnicole (talk) 10:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chandler

[edit]

Hi Polly, sorry to disturb you but I was wondering if you could tell me if this image I uploaded is too big. Image:Chandler Bing.jpgFairfieldfencer FFF 18:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)\[reply]

On [Kushk-e_Ahmad_Shahi, Niavaran_Palace_Complex.jpg]

[edit]

Dear Polly, why this haste? The image is due to Hamed Saber (why do you say that the source is not given, while the source is well given?!) who has given a blanket permission to use all his photographs on Wikipedia. Could I therefore request you kindly to remove that despised (from my perspective) removal tag? Please check this and see that the image is indeed CC: [2]. With kind regards from a deeply dissatisfied Wikipedia editor, --BF 17:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Dear Polly, I now realise that you may not have been responsible for that removal tag. Why should I put a Hang-On for someone else's error? That damned thing must not be there to begin with! If people cannot read, they simply should not be put in a position to tag images. I am truly fed up by this nuisance of constantly having to fight a hoard of know-nothings and do-gooders. I am going to remove that tag. With kind regards, --BF 17:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand you Polly. The image is CC and, as I said earlier, Hamed Saber has given a blanket permission to use all his photographs on Wikipedia. Please forgive me, but I have lost all my patience; it is constantly arguing for things that need no arguing. I write 5 lines for Wikipedia entries and am forced to write 5000 lines in response to various people about utterly irrelevant matters. --BF 17:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Polly, have you checked the photograph yet? I mean this: [3]. Is it CC or not? If yes, then please remove that tag forthwith. --BF 17:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's a CC non-free license as no derivative works are permitted. This type of CC license isn't acceptable to Wikipedia. Polly (Parrot) 18:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rules seem to be changing by the day here on Wikipedia; one constantly feels that one is walking on shifting sand. If this CC is not acceptable to Wikipedia, then they have to remove it from the list of prepared copy-right statements so that people do not waste their times senselessly. Whatever may or may not apply to "this" or "that" CC, please ask someone who has access to the necessary information: Hamed Saber has given a blanket permission for all his photographs to be used on Wikipedia. This is the third time that I have written this statement, how many times more have I to repeat it before I am listened to? Incidentally, why did you send me a welcome message? I did not join Wikipedia today or yesterday. Why this patronising? I apologise for my language, but since some time I have got zero tolerance for this game that some of your ilk are playing with people on Wikipedia. Kind regards, --BF 19:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC).[reply]
I am not aware of it, however I have read his statement, over a year ago, in which he clearly and unequivocally stated that he had provided Wikipedia with a written statement permitting all his photographs to be used on Wikipedia (he had also indicated that when using, the source of the photograph at issue be mentioned, which clearly I have done). It is possible that Saber's statement is to be found on his flickr page. Please note that since some time flickr is no longer accessible from Iran (it is filtered) so that in the event that Hamed Saber is in Iran, it may be very difficult to get in touch with him right now. Kind regards, --BF 19:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Polly, please have a look here: [4], the last but one paragraph. Kind regards, --BF 20:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've verified that this user releases images that are uploaded from his flickr to Wikipedia under cc-by 3.0, so it's all good. Stifle (talk) 20:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was just about to copy that bit to here, As requested by a friend, I granted a special license for WikiPedia: All my CC-BY-NC-SA photos can be used under CC-BY-3.0 just on WikiPedia (*.wikipedia.com) and WikiMedia (*.wikimedia.com). I'm not sure that the permission he gives is compatible with Wikipedia as the images use cannot be guaranteed to be restricted to Wikipedia, as Wikipedia's content is reproduced for commercial and derivative works. So this would probably conflict with the restrictive permission he gives. Polly (Parrot) 20:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Either the images are released under cc-by-3.0 or they are not. As I understand it, images in his gallery are released under cc-by-nd-3.0, and if they are uploaded to Wikipedia, he automatically also licenses them under cc-by-3.0. It is pretty clear that he intends for the images to be usable on Wikipedia and I would tend to interpret his comments that way. Stifle (talk) 22:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I read it he is only releasing the images under a cc-by-3.0 for use on Wikipedia and not anywhere else. This is a restrictive license and so cannot be compatible with cc-by-3.0 or GFDL. It is either cc-by-3.0 everywhere (not just Wikipedia) or nowhere. Polly (Parrot) 22:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Polly, I do not know who has disputed the image, but as you may realise I have a life to live outside these pages and cannot go on fighting people who seem to live by making themselves a nuisance to others (please read John Milton's poem on my talk page). I had just a message from User:Stifle who assured me that everything was alright with the image. He also told me that he would write to you about the matter. Insofar as I am concerned, the issue is closed. Kind regards, --BF 20:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Polly, thank you very much for the poem. You must not be of this Earth, sending me a poem after all that verbal injustice that I have done to you. I reciprocate your poem by the following which is one of my favourites: Aubade, by Philip Larkin. With kind regards, --BF 22:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Good stuff, Larkin was no sentimentalist that's for sure. He doesn't advocate rage, more the quiet and remorseless inevitability of it all. Still he and Dylan had the drink in common, though whether this aided their poetry or hindered it who can say. Polly (Parrot) 22:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dylan Thomas seems to be the patron saint of all alcoholics. Although Larkin drank a great deal, he was technically not an alcoholic; Thomas was, and died prematurely as a result of it. I love Dylan Thomas' Under Milk Wood, which is just a heavenly masterpiece. I even treasure a recording of it (1 hour 30 min, produced by BBC Wales) in which the First Voice is played by the celebrated Richard Burton. Kind regards, --BF 23:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As for the mental association of Richard Burton with War of the Worlds, you are absolutely right. Richard Burton is engraved on my memory through the film The Comedians ([5]) - the same film has engraved Alec Guinness (Major Jones), Elizabeth Taylor and Peter Ustinov on my memory. It is a must-be-seen film. --BF 23:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I've ever seen that film, it certainly has an impressive cast list and yet seems to be almost forgotten. Alec Guinness is one of my favourite actors, he was so versatile and brought whatever character he played to life. Whether it was serious, Charles I / George Smiley or his comedic roles Kind Hearts and Coronets / The Ladykillers. He always convinces. Polly (Parrot) 00:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then you have to see it. All the characters have a child-like aspect to them, a very subtle form of vulnerability, which make the film very special. And not to forget, the music, by Laurence Rosenthal, is one of the finest film musics I can think of. --BF 02:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I shall keep a look out for it. Polly (Parrot) 02:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Polly, thank you for the good news as well as for your efforts leading to change of the copy-right statements by Hamed Saber. With kind regards, --BF 21:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're very welcome, I'm just glad everything was resolved in such a positive way. Polly (Parrot) 21:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All thanks to you. You may wish to have a look here: [6]. Hamed seems now to have become an international celebrity for his flickr photographs of Iran. (I find it a pity that they have published his surname incorrectly: "Sabir" instead of "Saber". Unforgivable!) --BF 22:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An interesting read, it can't be easy for him though with the restrictions placed on Flickr by the Iranian Government. Images of the more remote and inaccesible areas of Iran are much needed, let's hope he manages to keep on uploading his work. Polly (Parrot) 22:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually there are very many interesting photographs of Iran (like this one [7], or this [8], or even this set [9]), as well as of elsewhere, on flickr, however the copy-right statuses of many of them are not compatible with the requirements of Wikipedia. I believe that one can get these photographs released for use on Wikipedia by asking their owners to adjust the copy-right statuses of them, exactly as you did in the case of Hamed Saber's photograph. And for this one has to have a flickr account. In the past I was seriously considering to join flickr for this very purpose, but was put off by the fact that the amount of personal details that they ask for membership is unnecessarily excessive; I figured out that with the personal details that they ask they can in principle get a passport issued under one's name, and much more. --BF 01:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just log into Flickr using one of my Yahoo email accounts, If you've got a Yahoo email account then that is all you need. If not it only takes 5 mins to set one up. Polly (Parrot) 01:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Polly, thank you very much for the information. I have indeed a Yahoo email account and just tried it and successfully got into flickr. I did not realise that this was possible. Kind regards, --BF 18:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk messages

[edit]

Please be aware of the message that you are sending when you issue templated talk messages. This message wasn't an appropriate one for someone who's been editing since 2006. Stifle (talk) 19:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gift...

[edit]
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For your wonderful work tagging poor image uploads. J Milburn (talk) 19:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Italian Empire

[edit]

Thanks, I wasn't sure how to do that. (Red4tribe (talk) 00:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Mike Post cover

[edit]

What's your issue with this photo? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Polly...

[edit]

...want a cracker? :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cracker Jack bag.JPG

Your "deletion tagging" of MY photos

[edit]
Resolved

Hi there Polly :-)

i just assume now that you actually did NOT read the license i placed on my photos which read: "This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License.

Attribution: If you want to use this pic for other purposes than wikipedia, please give me credit for my photo, mention were you got it from and publish it under the same or other compatible license. thank you."

This is MY OWN work and therefor i suggest you delete the inappropriate "deletion tag" you placed on my work. furthermore it is ESSENTIAL to the article i wrote. thank you. SomeUsr |  Talk Contribs 10:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • know what? i rmvd the tags myself. oh yeah and btw: next time pls actually READ the lc tag and WP:AGF. good day to you :-) SomeUsr |  Talk Contribs 11:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • When I tagged the image for a source it wasn't clear they were your images just that they were CC licensed. CC licensed images could come from a variety of sources. I'm glad you've cleared things up by clarifying that you are the creator of the images. I always try to AGF but when it comes to copyright matters it is always best to be as specific and clear as possible. Polly (Parrot) 19:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Polly/Archive_9&oldid=1146669779"