User talk:Rettetast/Archive 7

Space 1999 Moon Buggy

Thank you for restoring the picture. When I started contributing I didn't always do the rationales as I wasn't quite sure of how they worked. However, I was pretty sure I had done this one. I didn't think the logo would hurt in the episode listings as I thought it might have been encouraged to use a single non free image as much as possible, obviously without spamming the site though. Would a single episode still, like Star Trek TOS be appropriate though, as each still will be distinct to that particular article. Douglasnicol (talk) 18:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it is necessary to the article there is no problem to use a episode still, but if you use it for pure decoration, you come in conflict with WP:NFCC#8. If you feel that an image is needed to get the reader to understand something in the article, there should be no proble using a image. The logo was not necessary though, since it was already displayed on the main article for the series. Rettetast (talk) 18:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Liz Cosson (MAJGEN).jpg

Please explain your reasons why you feel obliged to edit this image when warned not to by other administrators.

Allow me to explain the copyright rules one more time. Suppose I take a photograph myself. The copyright would nominally be mine but since it is of Defence personnel I would need permission from DoD to upload or publish it. I apply for permission. (90 days passes.) DoD will then send back its pro forma. In return for reassigning copyright to the Crown, DoD will allow me to upload, subject to Fair Use. This means that it can freely be used for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, so long as the picture is used to illustrate the subject. Which of course is what we already have from the DodD press kit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hawkeye7 (talk • contribs)

Warned not to? O wikipedia we allow images that are under a free license or in public domain. Non-free images can be only be used if it pass our Non-free content criteria. This image is of a living person and a free can be created and it therefore fails criteria 1. Note that WP:NFCC is much stricter that fair use laws. Our goal is to create free content, and the result of allowing non-free content in instances like this is that we never will get a free image of this person. Rettetast (talk) 21:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, NONE of the criteria are disputed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image:VestronVideo.png

Rationale was added per your request and {{no rationale}} was removed. -- M (^speak/_spoken) 13:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Rettetast (talk) 15:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Space:1999 Moonbuggy and other pic issues

While it isn't about Space:1999 at this moment, the episode still idea I suggested is because look at any Star Trek TOS episode entry, for instance a few here....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_of_Terror

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_X_%28TOS_episode%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_No_Man_Has_Gone_Before_%28TOS_episode%29

Just three random examples, all showing what seems to be 'critical', plot important or distinctive moments from the episodes rather than a generic still. Is this sort of thing okay? Douglasnicol (talk) 19:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As long as it serves a purpose in the article and not purely decorative it should be ok. Rettetast (talk) 23:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMAGE

Ayo ...why is my image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TheErechtheum.JPG up for deletion...?The-real-zeus (talk) 01:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture/License

On June 2, 2007 you deleted a picture I posted on Stephen_Tyng_Mather_High_School. I am a Photographer/Alumi who took it. Would all I need to do for license is link to my website? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MattJBarnes (talk • contribs) 20:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You just need to release it under a free license like GFDL or CC-BY. Just like you did on Image:Minnie Mars Jamieson Elementary 2007.jpg. Rettetast (talk) 15:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Varg Veum

Thank you for helping with this article. Bearian 16:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NP. Rettetast 16:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cook items

Hello, I understand you are an administrator, but instead of going through and tagging everything, how about helping to fix it? I mean you have not explained how I can fix this. These images were sent to me and given to me to use in whatever way I see fit by the subjects publicity company or record label. Some of the photos were taken from Flickr which does fall within Free use. I am an entertainment historian, not a computer guru! So tell me, How do I stop you from continuing to tag everything I have worked so hard to do? What description needs to be put in or what template needs to be put in to keep these in place now that you have nominated everything for deletion? Thank youJunebug52 03:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for my earlier tone, but I have to admit you made me pretty mad with all of the editing you did on what seemed to be only my additions! However, I understand you are looking for rationales and if you will look I believe you will find that I have taken care of what seemed to be your concerns. If there is a problem, please write me on my talk page and I will see if I cannot figure out how to solve it. If you thik that I have an issue where any of these items may still be deleted, I would appreciate you letting me know and how I might fix it so that they are not mitigated from the subjects pages. It was a lot of work taking the photos as well as getting them from the subjects libraries! Junebug52 16:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Boss_Hogg.jpg

Forgive me for asking for a "tutorial", but in regards to your comment on my talk page, I'm not really sure how to provide the fair use rationale. I'd very much like to keep the picture up. Any recommendations?

Thanks! --Schmendrick (talk) 14:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The image is used on three articles. You have to provide a rationale that explains why the image complies with WP:NFCC for each of these. Rettetast (talk) 14:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads-up on Image:Argov.jpg

I have included the fair use justification and the required template. --Ravpapa (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NP. But only for one of the articles the image is used in. It has to have a separate rationale for each use. Rettetast (talk) 15:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, I must have some kind of permission to edit the articles of the wikipedia and to ensure they are not victims of vandalism? Example, I edited on the page of Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat, I need permits to keep this article?

(Heinrich Kerschbaumer) Thank you

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Heinrich Kerschbaumer (talk • contribs) 18:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There has not been much vandalism to this article. If there is a vandalproblem with an article, you can request protection at WP:RFPP. Note that we don't use protection to avoid a potential problem, only if there in fact is one. To protect articles goes against the fundamental idea of a wiki and we try to avoid it as much as we can. Rettetast (talk) 19:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need to answer my question on the image deletion page.--Gnfgb2 (talk) 01:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note Gnfgb2 (talk · contribs) is a sock of hard-banned user Primetime (talk · contribs). Any edits he makes to the project can and should be reverted. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't understand...

Hello. I'm sorry, I don't understand. Why were the logos in the CFC article removed? Most of them appear only once there, I haven't included them in any other article (any reproduction is not my own doing, honestly). Please, I would really like to have an explanation. Thank you.

Non-free images can only be included per WP:NFCC. To have 20 logos in an article fails criteria 3 and 8.

Keith Clifford

Obviously the comment you made to the poster above indicates why you feel the images on Last of the Summer Wine violate policy. However, you claim that the image on Keith Clifford violates fair use because a free equivalent is available (number one). However, to prove this, wouldn't you have to prove there is a free version available?

Also, when you put a template on a page, as you did with Last of the Summer Wine and Recurring characters in Last of the Summer Wine, could you please leave a note on the talk page of the articles to indicate why you are putting the templates on the page? I have no problem trying to comply with Wiki policy. However, the image policies are confusing and at times unclear. The template was obviously desgined so that the person adding it would add a note to clarify their position (hence the note "See the talk page for details". We can't comply, however, if we don't know what the problem is. -- Redfarmer (talk) 08:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied on the talk page. The image of Keith Clifford violates criteria 1 because an image depicting him can be created and not because an equivalent currently exists. The reasoning for this is that it would be much harder to get people to create free content if we allowed such images. Rettetast 15:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Trinity Blood characters

Hi. You recently tagged this as having too many non-free images. I had been alerted to this issue a week or two ago and, along with several editors, a strenuous effort was made to cute down on the number of non-free images. The page originally had almost 20, but we've replaced many with group images. This work is still going on, but I'm curious as to how many is considered too many for an article of this length? AnmaFinotera (talk) 01:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Mandrell

Excuse me, but I believe that is the best fair use rationale out there, it clearly says why it is being used because it NOT fair use. I have not had other problems with other images I uploaded with this rationale. If you insis, what should I add to it so it shows why it is being used in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dottiewest1fan (talk • contribs) 20:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I found this image to work. I just realized I accidentally added on her rationale that she was deceased, and I deleted it because this is NOT true. Dottiewest1fan (talk) 20:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images of living people are generally considered replaceable, and fails our non free content criteria #1(See WP:NFCC). Rettetast (talk) 20:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable Fair Use

Greetings! I was going through Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 December 8, and I noticed you had listed a couple of images because they are replaceable and non-free. That's great. . . but did you know you can tag the images with {{subst:rfu}} instead? They'll get deleted after a week either way, but many people find that's easier. You may already know all about that, but I thought I'd let you know just in case. Also, User:Howcheng has made a clever script that you can use to make listing as easy as clicking a button; see User talk:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js if you're interested. Thanks for helping out with image cleanup! All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 23:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Quadell. The images was listed on Ifd because the user has uploaded similar images several times that all has gotten deleted the rfu way. I wanted G4 to apply so I can just delete images if the user reuploads such bandimages. Rettetast (talk) 06:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Refurbished Waterloo & City Line train image

At the time I uploaded the image it wasn't replaceable by a free image, so it was a valid fair use rationale then. This is no longer the case though and I'll try and get a replacement photo tomorrow. Thryduulf (talk) 22:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About the Red Skelton image

I'm not sure why you believe there is a problem with the image of Red Skelton that I had uploaded. I personally obtained the image from the webmaster of the official Red Skelton web site, who acts as an official spokesman for the Skelton estate. I explained that in te description when I uploaded it. I don't know how much more official it can be. I'm not sure what else I could do to further justify the fair use of that image. Joe (talk) 05:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline. The bottom line is that you have to explain why the image is vital to thearticle and why it can't be replace by a free image. Rettetast (talk) 08:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Europe

Many of the dates were added by User:Hemlock Martinis. [1] --Mathsci (talk) 11:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other editors are now putting back century references. Perhaps they think they're useful, who knows. Mathsci (talk) 15:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lehár photo

As I mentioned in Lehár's template (my rvt comment), usually WIKI will remove the source of the photo and not at some section only. I have no issue for the photo to be deleted but why only at the template when you can still find it someplace else? It is recommended for you to remove it from the root (original source). Thanks - Jay (talk) 02:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We only allow very restricted use of non free content. While you can use the image to identify the subject in the article [[Franz Lehár]. You can not use it on all articles related to this person and definitly not in a template. See WP:NFC for the full policy and guideline on non free content. Rettetast (talk) 06:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting vandalism to my member page

Thanks a lot for your revert to my member page! I'll post a message on my discussion too, but thought I'd get this to you directly. Wakedream (talk) 02:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You flagged an image I uploaded

Hi. You flagged an image I uploaded. I followed the instructions regarding contesting this, i.e.

1.Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.

Which I did and the flag shows up, however regarding step 2 below:

2.On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

When I went to the discussion page, it automatically generated a redirect command with some brackets [[ ]] where it directed to insert the text, which I did. However, this created a "redirect to docsavage20". When I further click on either the discussion tab or the talk tab under my username, my dispute statement shows up nowhere on the page, only the original flags. The only place my statement of dispute shows up is in the "edit" section under User Docsavage20. Seems that something isn't correct. Please advise what I need to do to correct this.

Thanks

Docsavage20 (talk) 19:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Rettetast (talk) 00:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 00:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image of Peter Pek

This picture was release by the studio as part of a Press Release kit. They intend for the picture to be used. Why was this removed and how do I fix it? Thanks.-- S Masters (talk) 09:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have an exact file name for the image? We don't allow press kit images of living persons on wikipedia. Since they are not released under a free license they have to comply with our criteria for non free nontent (WP:NFCC). Images of living persons fail criteria #1 since a free equivalent could be created. Rettetast (talk) 12:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the image is Image:Firm dynamic.jpg. -- S Masters (talk) 03:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Peter Pek, the image Image:Firm dynamic.jpg is replceable with another image of this person. Rettetast (talk) 14:30, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image of Jonathan Linsley

I see you have removed the image of this actor in his role as Crusher in Last of the Summer Wine from his article, quoting WP:NFC, but with no further explanation. I am afraid that I cannot follow your reasoning here. The image meets all the policy criteria as far as I can see, and the fair use rationale is complete and accurate. In general, I believe that every article about an actor should have at least one image of that actor, preferably in one of his roles, to enable readers to fully understand who they are reading about.

I see you are taking a short break, so rather than posting a comment and then waiting for your return, and having the problem of the image being deleted from Wikipedia altogether, I have reinstated it, in good faith.

Thank you. Patche99z (talk) 15:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images of living person fails [WP:NFCC]]s first criteria since a free image can be created. Therefore we don't allow such images. Rettetast (talk) 14:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Revols & Kalmusky Images

I'm hoping you can help me, you've marked Images I have uploaded as being copyright disputed, the newspaper Images, originally uploaded as "low resolution "Fair Use rationale" Newspaper Clippings, were removed as I'm a wikipedia Newbie, and obviously didn't create the Fair Use rationale properly. As for the original Black and white Photo's, And color photos of Ken, Richard Manual, and John Till, these are the personal photographs of the late Ken Kalmusky, whom the article is about. I am the webmaster for his son, David Kalmusky, who inherited, owns all of these photographs, and releases them, with full permission, to the public, for these articles. I don't know how to get this across to Wikipedia, David can be e-mailed through his site, can write a letter, with a scan of his passport??? I keep having these pictures deleted, I'd just like to have a final, permanent solution, so that I can move on, and create more articles, about some of the other people involved in these famous circles, of Canadian Music history. I'd sure appreciate your help, and knowledge, to once and for all, complete this article, and not have it's images disputed.

Thanks Qwepasdl (talk) 21:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you have cleaned up the images pretty good yourself. All except for the newspaper images should be resolved. Rettetast (talk) 14:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. I've done the newspaper clippings as well, hopefully everything is now properly done, Thanks again Qwepasdl (talk) 09:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

image tagging

Hi,

At my talk page you offered to explain how to to install that script. If you have a moment and could help me with that, I'd appreciate it.--Rockfang (talk) 22:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Rettetast (talk)

Thanks for doing that for me.--Rockfang (talk) 19:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

McFarland Hall Use Questioned

Thanks for your input/information on the image I uploaded (mcfarlandhall.jpg) for the Wiki page on Valley City State University. The "fair use," etc., information used was suggested by a Wiki editor. (The initial message that my use was in question was posted on my talk page; I subsequently responded to the editor via email. I will try to find that email--don't know if I still have it--if that will help. Anyhow, here's my info: I am the Vice President for Academic Affairs at Valley City State University. We have a stock of publicity photos we use--that I have a right to use in items relating to the university. The photo also appears on our website.) I do not understand what Wiki copyright category I should use--none seem to fit this exact situation, to the extent I have been able to look through copyright discussion on the relevant Wiki pages.

So, your help/assistance would be very much appreciated. One editor told me I could not post it the way I had originally, and suggested I should put just what now appears with the photo. Now another editor is telling me that's not right--so, any help would be appreciated!!

Thanks--

Sincerely, Joseph Bessie Vice President for Academic Affairs Valley City State University --jbessie (talk) 03:37, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up. Below, please find the correspondence referred to above regarding use of the picture in question. The exchange is between Skier RMH and me; I apologize for the formatting of the part that appears first, below--I tried inserting breaks but the result was unsuccessful. --jbessie (talk) 16:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. If you check the image page you'll see that I've added the "Fair Use" for this image. This must accompany any non-free uses or they get tagged for deletion. You may want to double check any other images of this nature you or others have uploaded.
There is a "bot" that tags these, looking for specifics within the page - and having the basics there will usually keep the image safe.
If there's any other questions, just reply here or on my talk page.
RMH
On Nov 27, 2007 8:16 AM, Joseph Bessie <joseph.bessie@vcsu.edu> wrote:
> Thank you very much for your reply.
>
> The page containing the image is:
> http://www.vcsu.edu/campustour/vcsubuildingpages/mcfarland.htm
>
> I have also attached the image here--I don't have a link to the image.
>
> Please let me know if the image can't be restored and must be re-uploaded.
>
> Thanks again for your assistance--
>
> Joe
>
> Joseph Bessie, Ph.D.
> Vice President for Academic Affairs
> Valley City State University
> 101 College Street SW
> Valley City, ND 58072
>
> Phone: (701) 845-7200 or (701) 845-7202
> Toll-free: (800) 532-8641, Ext. 7200
> FAX: (701) 845-7245
>
> Valley City State University has been named A BEST COLLEGE in the
> Midwest for ten consecutive years (U.S. News & World Report)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Skier RMH [2]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 9:17 AM
> To: Joseph Bessie
> Subject: Re: Wikipedia e-mail
>
> Greetings,
>
> As you described it, the VSCU owns the copyright for this image
> (Mcfarlandhall.jpg) and similar ones. Therefore they can be put up if
> they have the correct fair use & source & license. The "GFDL-self" is
> not applicable here, as you personally don't hold the copyright, even
> though you may act on behalf of the organization. Most likely
> "{{Non-free promotional}}" is the most appropriate, given the source.
> If you can supply me with the EXACT link (source) of the image in
> question, which should be on the vscu website, I can restore the image
> with the correct license, etc. Without that link, the image can't be
> restored.
>
> Hope this helps... RMH
>
> On Nov 26, 2007 8:33 AM, Jbessie <joseph.bessie@vcsu.edu> wrote:
> > Hello--
> >
> > I hope it's OK to send an email directly.
> >
> > I noticed that you deleted an image of McFarland Hall at Valley City State University.
> >
> > I am not sure how best to tag this image. I'm the academic VP at VCSU (senior VP). The image is from a catalogue of images we use for any number of purposes--I have a right to use it as I see fit, although I did not create it (the U owns the thing).
> >
> > How should this be tagged so that it's not deleted? Any help you may be able to offer would be much appreciated.
> >
> > (I also have a user page in Wikipedia, in case more info about me is
> > wanted/useful.)
> >
> > Thanks for any help,
> >
> > Joseph Bessie, Ph.D.
> > Vice President for Academic Affairs
> > Valley City State University
> >
>

Hi. Sorry for the late answer, but here I am. In wikipedia we only allow free content, and images therefore has to be under a free license. As RMH said in the e-mail, VSCU owns the copyright for this image and it is only VSCU that can release the image under a free license.

The exception from free content on wikipedia is fair use. Such content has to cpmply with our Non-free content criteria, and this image does not since it is an image of a building where a free equivalent could be created.~(criteria #1) Since obtaining a free license on this image from VSCU, much likely is harder than just taking a new image yourself, and release it under a free license, such as GFDL, my advice would be to do that. Rettetast (talk) 15:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ross_Lockridge_Jr_1947.jpg

I have added a fair-use rationale for Image:Ross_Lockridge_Jr_1947.jpg and removed the no-free-use template. If the fair-use rationale is not sufficient, please contact me. -- Cuppysfriend (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page

Aren't you going to leave a message on the talk page for the Fullmetal Alchemsit military characters? I can not adress your issues with the article unless you give me some idea of what you want to see done, and I having articles I value tagged with meitencance templates bugs me immensely. Meet me half way on this issue, would you please? TomStar81 (Talk) 22:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I will explain. Most often people ignore the template and I end up doing the work anyway so I am using the tags to find back to the article. I have now explained the tag on the talk page. Cheers. Rettetast (talk) 22:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explination and the advice on both talk pages. I apreciate the help. I was unaware of the move against single fair use images for all characters in lists, although as a practical matter I can see the issue from both sides of the coin. I left a message at the anime and manga project, as you suggested, and am currently waiting for a reply. Have a Happy New Year! TomStar81 (Talk) 23:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Scc-group.jpg

Oh come on, what the hell. The fair use is correct. I already tried searching for a freely-licensed image and there's none. Tasc0 ^{It's a zero!} 02:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Da Vinci barnstar

Noticed you on Sheryl Crow article. I have sent a star on your userpage. Vikrant 13:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Fair use rationale for Image:GUC_logo.jpg

Hi, actually I added this image to use in a userbox, but it didn't work. So the image is now useless, I think, specially since there is a similar image with the whole logo. Anyway the image was the logo of my university and you can check out the page if you want to see the other logo. Regards Abdallah (talk) 19:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3

Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on WP:100! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --El on ka 05:34, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marbella

The page about the city of Marbella are having a high index of vandalism, I would like to know how can I revert this, The User: Whpq is reversing the current article for the past article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Louis Du Pasquier (talk • contribs)

Comment: It's User:whpq chiming in here. The edits in question was my attempt to unravel copyright violations introduced into the article. I've added a comment in Talk:Marbella, and left a copyvio notice on User talk:Louis Du Pasquier. Note that the same actions were needed for the articles Nice, and Valencia, Spain. Regards - Whpq (talk) 03:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Thanks for letting me know. Have added the extra information. Happy new year! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmylotte (talk • contribs) 00:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bushmaster M4 image?

If you think it can be replaced, can you please take a photo and fill it? Otherwise it will have to remain until a suitable replacement can be found, thanks. Hayden120 (talk) 13:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article, over 60 nations use this firearm. There is no reason why a free replacement can't be created. The image therefore fails WP:NFCC#1. Rettetast (talk) 13:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Image:MaryHarney.jpg

When I initially uploaded the image I found it on an Irish wiki politics site assuming that it was creative commons. Another user (Guliolopez) found that it was infact from the website of the Progressive Democrats. I have searched since and have been unable to locate an image which has no copyright. I believe that it does fulfill the first non-free content criterion for this reason. Medos2 (talk) 20:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with OctavianCover.jpg

Hello,

Thanks for the alert about the missing template for the above image.

I'd like some help. I've looked all through the instructions, but the template keeps telling me the article the image is used in does not exist. I've tried everything and I can't fix this.

Your assistance is appreciated. Sorry for the bother.

Seduisant (talk) 15:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed it. Rettetast (talk) 15:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried searching for the Couples for Christ pictures

I'm sorry, but I've really tried searching for the pictures of those guys whose pictures were at the Couples for Christ article, but I can't find any available free picture on the internet. If you do, please tell me, so that I can post them. And by the way, their pictures are at the CFC website itself (I even gave the link there). This was different from the last set of pictures, which came from the Ugnayan magazine of CFC, which I presume (I hope I'm wrong) you haven't seen in your entire life. Besides, I copied the exact license from the Image:Carl Anderson.jpg picture at the Knights of Columbus article just to be safe. My only intention is to make the faces of our leaders known so that they can be accountable to the CFC community, and I hope you understand that. By the way, are you monitoring the CFC article so that you can slap the pictures with that non-free content tag every time I upload them? You didn't even notify me that I'm violating the criterion again. Jedjuntereal (talk) 01:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images of living person can easily be created and released under a free license. I have tagged your example. Why don't you take some images yourself, and release them under a free license?. Rettetast (talk) 12:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ty_Nant_logo.jpg

Thanks for your note. I have updated and enlarged the free use rationale, but the image still shows a tag suggesting it has no free use rationale - can you please advise? Thank you! Rgds, - Trident13 (talk) 13:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason lays within Template:Non-free promotional and you can see how to fix it there. Since this is a logo, {{non-free logo}} is enough, an I have removed {{Non-free promotional}}. Rettetast (talk) 14:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Equestrian Sports Moscow 1980.jpg

Could I get this image that was deleted back. I've seen the author's other contributions, and it seems like it only needs a backlink and maybe a wordier rationale, but it has a source and meets the other criteria. MBisanz ^talk 02:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Rettetast (talk) 12:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Magnetophone

Hello, you sent a message to Roomfulofechoes recently concerning the entry on Magnetophone, and the images used there and I was hoping you could help me. Most of the images on there have been removed, and as the artist I have the rights to give permission for the entry to use the images. Could you please tell me what we need to do to get them to stick, as the information in the help pages is a little labyrinthine to say the least, at least to me! Thanks in advance. Matt Huish Saunders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthuishsaunders (talk • contribs) 18:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Image:ESF EN1.JPG

I have, on the discussion page of the image, documented why this image has a creative commons licence. Now this image just has been deleted by you (and together with it, my comment has been deleted as well). Why? --Tillmo (talk) 10:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I have just seen that the image has been restored. --Tillmo (talk) 10:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your NFCC#10c deletions - not a complaint!!!

Can you tell, from which category are you deleting? I don't want to edit-conflict with you. Maxim_(talk) 15:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little here and some there. I have tried to clean the related changes of the main category for January 2 so that only betacommands edits are left. I don't think I will do many more deletions today, but I can stick to Category:Disputed non-free images as of 2 January 2008 3 so that we don't edit conflict. Rettetast (talk) 15:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, as I'm planning to use a very high-speed script to clear out after I removed all the images that are not last edited by the bot. Maxim_(talk) 15:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you stop deletions and wait until the end of Sunday? See the ANI thread here. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 21:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I'll wait. Rettetast (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

James Galway editing

You sent me a message saying I experimented on James Galway, but I didn't do so. Would there be an explanation for this happening (i.e. someone editing with my IP address)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.87.238 (talk) 20:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The message was sent in february 2007, so it was probably someone else. Don't worry about it. Rettetast (talk) 20:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fair use images

On List of minor Sailor Moon characters and List of Saiyans in Dragon Ball, should the images be removed per WP:FUC (#3 and #8)? I'd do it, but I'm no expert on this. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 15:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Super Saiyan appears to have too many images. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My interpretation of WP:NFCC is that most of these images have to go. There has Been a lot of discussion about this at WT:NFC and group images such as the one at the top on Super Saiyan is preferred over images of each charachter. Rettetast (talk) 20:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more careful when tagging images as not having a fair use rationale. Image:Bra'tac in 'Reckoning Part II'.jpg had one. Bryan Derksen (talk) 05:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Portland Harbor image

regarding the picture i uploaded on the caleb cushing article, the image is over 100 years old and is no longer copywrite protected, i also beleive that the newspaper iteslf is no longer in existance. The age of the article along is enough to merit it as being a free image and i believe the image page stated this before you placed the unfree tag there. it is not an unfree image at all and i would like you to remove the tag since you are the one that placed it there. XavierGreen —Preceding unsigned comment added by XavierGreen (talk • contribs) 23:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy it ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^$1,000,000? 15:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damn, You are quick:-) Already deleted when I got there. Cheers. Rettetast (talk) 15:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caterpillar Club Image

Thank you for driving me away from Wikipedia. It is more trouble than it is worth. Lou Sander (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Image025.jpg

This is my own work, and I will change the tag if need be because my original intention was that it to be used freely. I must have selected the wrong tag by accident and will change that if necessary. - Cheers, Vicer ^{Userpage | Talk} 20:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Iso_Isettacarro.jpg

I am sorry but I find your message incomprehensible. Do what ever you want. I give in with the barrage of jargon I am receiving. Oldfarm (talk) 14:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for driving me away from Wikipedia. It is more trouble than it is worth. Oldfarm (talk) 14:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you expect any help with that attitude? Rettetast (talk) 15:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon my attitude, but I am currently recovering from a serious illness. I have come to expect no help from Wikipedia administrators, only incomprehensible complaints Oldfarm (talk) 03:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy McSweeney's Quarterly Concern

I wanted to thank you for taking the time to correct the table in the article Timothy McSweeney's Quarterly Concern when you removed the images. I knew the image-removal was coming, and I wasn't overjoyed about it, but I appreciate your thoughtfulness in making the necessary adjustments to the table. I do have a question: Would one image be allowed for illustrative purposes? Cheers--ShelfSkewed Talk 17:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NP, it took some time, but it is better to do it properly when you ar at it. An image on the top of the article should not be a problem. Do you want me to delete the now orphaned images so that you don't get dozens of warnings on your talk page? Rettetast (talk) 17:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that would be much appreciated. The one I selected for the article is Image:McSweeneys15.jpg; the rest can go. --ShelfSkewed Talk 18:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Image:McSweeneys9.jpg was used in another article, so i did not delete it. It does not have a rationale for the article it is used in though. Rettetast (talk) 18:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you write the fair use rationale yourself?

I am too lazy. Thanks. Andries (talk) 20:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Judith Guest

What, exactly, is your reasoning for considering that picture replaceable? Do you know something about her public appearance schedule that I don't? I have let other LP pictures I uploaded before we decided to change the policy around get deleted; I wrote a rationale here because I really don't think she'd be able to be available for a picture. If you're going to slap that tag on images for which a rationale has been written, you owe the uploader an explanation for why you don't think so.

Are we now just considering every image of a living person to be replaceable because they're living? And people wonder why I was so upset about WP:REFU being rejected. Daniel Case (talk) 21:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Living person. There is nothing special about here. That she does not update here blog is not evidence that it is unreasonable to get an image of here. Why is this image so important anyway. Sure it is nice to have an image of the person, but the physical apperance of this person is not important to understand the encyclopedic article about here. Rettetast (talk) 12:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For reclusive individuals who do not make public appearances (Terence Malick, Cormac McCarthy) and do not put out any schedule as such, fair use images have been accepted since it has been ruled unreasonable that a free image could be found or created. At this point I consider Ms. Guest the same ... no announcements of public appearances in three years, no new books scheduled, not easy to get a hold of.

I am standing on this point because when the policy was changed, those of us who expressed misgivings about the wide-open definition of "not replaceable" were reassured that images of living people would not be deleted just because they were living. Your first two words are exactly what we were afraid of back then.

I could just undelete the image myself, but I think we can discuss this at deletion review instead. Daniel Case (talk) 07:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

n

Can you tell me how to create a new infobox? --Baks (talk) 18:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I know little of creating infoboxes. Rettetast (talk) 12:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I could really care less

I hardly remember posting the image anyway. Good luck, and Happy Super Bowl! padawer (talk) 04:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion on images

Perhaps you can better explain the image policies over here. Appears some people just don't get it. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Justices_3dca.jpg

I've added my rationale as to why I think a free image is unlikely to be ever available. See Image talk:Justices_3dca.jpg. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Utah Phillips image

This image of Utah Phillips is apparently scheduled for deletion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Utah_bw_sm.jpg

Utah Phillips is my friend, and a member of the Industrial Workers of the World, a union in which i currently hold an elected position. Utah sent a photograph (of himself holding his union card) to me via U.S. mail.

I used Photoshop to redesign the image that Utah sent to me. I removed the existing, cluttered background. I then added a white background, simulating a wall; a guitar; a union symbol on the wall; and, shadows, altering approximately fifty percent of the surface area. According to my understanding from my graphic design training, this makes it a new work, incorporating one original element from a different source. I created this new image with implied permission, because i was engaged in publicity activities for a Utah Phillips concert. Utah Phillips is familiar with the redesigned image, because we've used it at concerts when he has performed in Denver.

Someone else apparently obtained the photo from my website, where i specifically had made it available for general usage, and uploaded it to Wikipedia.

http://www.rebelgraphics.org/utah.html

I had placed no restrictions on its use, and was in fact pleased to see its use on Wikipedia.

Obtaining a new image of Utah at this time is impossible. He is seriously ill and in need of a heart transplant. And i certainly would not wish to bother him about Wikipedia's specific use of this image while he is ill, if someone was to suggest that was necessary.

Now it happens that folk singers and union activists across the country are holding benefit concerts (winter and spring 2008) for Utah's medical expenses. The ready availability of this image contributes to that vital cause. Please advise if and how we can continue to keep this image available to the public.

Richard Myers Denver, Colorado rtmyers@h2net.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Myers (talk • contribs) 11:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:FURG for guidelines on how to write a rationale. This looks like a solid case where a non free image may be apropriate. Rettetast (talk) 11:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More help in the message I left for the uploader at User_talk:Scaife#Fair_use_rationale_for_Image:Utah_bw_sm.jpg. Rettetast (talk) 11:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have further researched the original photo. The source wasn't exactly what i had remembered. The photo that Utah Phillips sent me was actually a photo postcard, and it has a copyright, plus the name of the photographer. I may have enough information to seek permission for use. However, at this time i believe it would best to remove the Utah Phillips photo, and if i am able to obtain permission for the derivative compilation, i will upload it again. best wishes, Richard Myers (talk) 05:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kenneth_E_Boulding.jpg

You warned me that this picture has no fair use rational but the page discription does have one. So I don't understand your action. Could you explain this? Thank you. -- Mdd (talk) 16:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AN hones mistake. Rettetast (talk) 17:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you. -- Mdd (talk) 19:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-fair use images

No need to warn me about the images of the women's hockey players. I do realize that they're all replaceable. At the time I uploaded, I thought that the use to which I was putting them was valid under the fair-use policy. Since then the policy has been changed/clarified to make that use invalid. So just go ahead and tag them. Tabercil (talk) 19:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Keeping traditions alive.jpg Fair use ok

I added this photo taken by myself as it is part of a press package and is authorised for publicity and education articles about Master Musicians of Joujouka no other free photos are available and the image is only used here in an article about the Master Musicians of Joujouka fulfilling the required issue re fair use.

Opiumjones 23 (talk) 21:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are the copyright holder to this image, you can just release the image under a free license like GFDL. Just add {{GFDL-self}} to the image description page. Rettetast (talk) 20:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Erased your comment

I have erased you comment on my talk page. Had you read the disclosure at the top of the page you would have seen that I am no longer active on Wikipedia and no longer care about the fates of the images that Up loaded and used according to the old image use policy. In fact, had you bothered to read the comment page you would have known that I don['t care about the fate of these images, and secondly not to post the notice.

Had you read the fair use criteria you would have found that the image origianlly quaified for Fair Use when up loaded.

I don't fault you for wanting to keep Wikipedia on the up and up, but please pay attention to what a page says before you start posting stuff like this - it leads me to believe that one is so busy tagging and marking images for deletion that one is not reading through rationales for why the image qualifies in the first place. Stude62 (talk) 03:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are not active there is no point in blocking you for personal attacks, but be aware the kind of edit summaries are not tolerated at wikipedia. I use an automatic tool too tag images an it also notifies uploaders. If I come over another non-compliant image uploaded by you, you will get another message. Rettetast (talk) 20:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Please enable your email. A user that you blocked, 08greenhornet (talk · contribs), is requesting unblock stating that he tried to email you and could not. Email is the only way that a blocked user can get in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rettetast&action=edit Editing User talk:Rettetast - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediatouch with the blocking admin so it is important that anyone who is using the block button be able to be contacted via email. Thanks. --B (talk) 23:09, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lake_chagan.jpg

Back in my fuzzy head, I thought it a pre-1973 Soviet photo, hence PD, but can't find the documentation, or the documentation was removed. I did pick it up from [3], as I recall. I search [4] and Copyright_law_of_the_Soviet_Union, but the problem is I can't find my original rationale: is it a pre-1973 Soviet image, despite the Roman type in English? At the time I had justice to this, so felt it PD & OK for wikipedia.

I oppose putting non-free images on w'pedia as much as anyone, and while I've made a couple mistakes, my record is pretty good. Be it I made a mistake, the image goes.

dino (talk) 18:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Network; Ladies Be Seated; Rationale

The rationale has been inserted. Eric O. Costello (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to caution User:AjaxSmack

On 25 Janury, you reverted [5] his re-insertion of fair use album covers onto a discography article at [[Down to Earth and High Cumberland Jubilee compilations]. Since that time, he's re-inserted the images three times [6][7][8], claiming that he is supported by WT:NFC and WP:NFC. He's also now accusing me [9] of violating WP:OWN because I continue to revert his re-insertions against policy and further claiming that my removals of these images in this usage is a unilateral interpretation. Your help is requested. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 05:42, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete InfinetementPetit.jpg

That`s not an fair use image, but actualy an public domain pic from archive.org. User?Mdob —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdob (talk • contribs) 20:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undeleted and retagged. Rettetast (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sorry I haven't signed before. I was accessing from a public house with a misconfigured keyboard (i.e. no tilde). Mdob | Talk 12:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images for deletion in your spare time

Here is a list of non-free images I uploaded, that should be deleted since they could not possibly have any valid use claim and have been orphaned. If its speeds things up for you, forgo the 48 notice to the uploader, myself. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 21:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1960 Teepees.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Brian Kilrea.jpg (orphaned)
Image:CalderCupTrophy.gif (orphaned)
Image:Fincups team photo.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Flyers 1952 1953.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Generals GM Logo.jpg (orphaned, replaced by new version)
Image:Guelph platers 1986.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Kingston canadians logo.jpg (orphaned, replaced by new version)
Image:Kingston raiders logo.jpg (orphaned, replaced by new version)
Image:Londonknights2005.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Markham waxers 1970.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Marlboros1967.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Marlboros1973.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Otters champions.jpg (orphaned)
Image:Trophy memorial cup.jpg (orphaned)

NP. All deleted. Rettetast (talk) 22:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias :-) Flibirigit (talk) 00:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion per #10c

I'm not an admin so I can't take a look at the images that have been deleted. However, doesn't it make more sense to simply remove the image from the page in question (WP:NFCC#10c) rather than delete the entire image because one image is lacking a rationale? Again, I can't look at the rationale and these images might be lacking a rationale entirely. Let me know (I'll watch your talk page). Mønobi 23:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The images I delete does not have a valid rationale for any article. They were tagged on Janurary 21 and we have postponed deletion for some time so that there is a chance for someone to fix them. There has been left notices at the uploaders talk page and on talk pages where the images is used. I am planning to delete about 3-400 images in this category a day, until it is emptied. If you or someone else want me to undelete an image I will do it so that a rationale can be provided. Just give me a note. Rettetast (talk) 23:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I figured that was the case. Carry on (: Mønobi 00:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sur95poster.jpg

Could you possibly undelete this image. I was just about to put a rationale on it earlier today, only to find it had been deleted. Regards, D.M.N. (talk) 16:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Rettetast (talk) 17:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've added a rationale. Regards, D.M.N. (talk) 17:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Valentine's Day!

A short/sweet little message, which I hope has made your day better! Happy Valentine's Day!!! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 02:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Killing Loneliness.jpg

10:01, 11 January 2008 Rettetast (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Killing Loneliness.jpg" ‎ (Deleted because "In Category:Disputed non-free images as of 2 January 2008. Invalid rationale per WP:NFCC#10c". using TW)

I am happy to provide a fair use rationale per WP:NFCC as soon as you undelete the image. — Save_Us † 20:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undeleted. Rettetast (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added a rationale and readd to the article, thanks. — Save_Us † 20:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lashband.jpg

I did give a rationale of why it meets fair use, I pasted it on both the image and discussion pages, I really don't know why you tagged it. --MOONGOER (talk) 07:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there is a partial rationale, and i should not have tgged it wth the "no rationale"-tag. However you need to explain not just why the image can not be replaced, but for what use it is intended for in wikipedia. Rettetast (talk) 22:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've done that now, if you think my rationale is acceptable you can remove the tag. --MOONGOER (talk) 16:29, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cemal Gürsel gallery

Rettetast, I saw that you reverted the anonymous user at Image:Kennedy Gursel Speeches.jpg, and will just say that the rationale they keep repeating (that the newspaper articles, images, whatever are somehow somewhat public) is being used on all the images in the Cemal Gürsel gallery but with different copyright tags showing up. For example,

Image:ArmyGames.jpg is both believed to be public domain and a GFDL image.

Image:WithACadet.jpg is both user-created public domain and a GFDL image (same user interestingly enough)

Image:InErzurum.jpg is just GFDL.

Image:GurselandInonu.jpg is copyrighted, believed to be public domain, and user-created public domain!

Do you have any suggestions? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw the mess and added the page to my watchlist. Most of the images on this article are tagged with numerous tags. The GFDL-tags are the most dubious. There are no evidence for a GFDL-release on these images. Fair ue is also claimed on most of the images. Many of these images will fail criteria 3 and 8, and should be removed if fair use is rhe last resort. I found this discussion at commons that has to do with {{PD-TR-Gov}}-template. It looks like images released by the Turkish government is PD after 70 years. Cemal Gürsel was in office in the 60s so this tag can not be used for most of these images. Maybe we should just remove the tags that are clearly are wrong and orphan images that can not be used as fair use. Rettetast (talk) 14:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have listed three images at WP:PUI

You seem to have found a fan. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a note at WP:ANI after the last one got particularly nasty. I just had to block him. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to say more but I'd check those WP:PUI listings (and the images) if I were you. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at the weekend. I don't have much time for wikipedia just now. Always nice to get a fan though. Rettetast (talk) 09:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation

All I want to do is vandalise using Opera Mini. Now you will make me have to seek out other articles to vandalise. I love the web browser and want to give something back to its users by letting them feel part of this campaign. I suppose you ARE only doing your job though. I bear neither you nor Opera ill will. Wikipedia on the other hand... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.189.142.172 (talk) 18:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

kevinpatel24

can you put my article named kevinpatel24 back in wikipedia, Please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.243.130 (talk) 15:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I can't. You can use your userpage for such stuff. Rettetast (talk) 16:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

Thanks for the heads up. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I had to throw your name out there, since it was you who listed the images in the first place. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He, he. No problem. Rettetast (talk) 12:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats?

Why thank you. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 17:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So far as I know, I am. That "why" was a conversational gambit, not a question. The question mark in the header was just whimsy :) --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 17:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]