User talk:Sherool/22 Nov 2006 - 16 Apr 2007

Your warning about my Images :S

I have tagged a whole heap of your images from the Jeddah article as missing source info, fair use rationales or just plain beeing replacable fair use images (I also noticed you had tagged many of them with {{PUInonfree}} yourself, does that mean you wish to have them deleted, or was that some sort of mistake?). There was also a GoogleEarth image tagged as GFDL-self that I changed to replacable fair use (Google images are not free licensed). --Sherool (talk) 15:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

sir , i re-edited the true colors of the images before i uploaded , doesnt that make them fair-user? , i dont want them to get deleted so give me a tip my friend :) Ammar 22:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Ammar shaker. --Sherool (talk) 07:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

really thanx sir , all will be done , but please give me enough time , because im afraid some moderator delete them while or before im working on them :) , and thanx again Ammar 22:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:1954studechampstar.jpg

Thank you for your note regarding this image. I agree with you opinion that this image could be replaced by a better free use image, however I disagree with you regarding your opinion that the image does not qualify for use because it fails the tags critieria.

First, Studebaker is no longer an automobile company - its folded forty years ago as an automobile manufacturer, and its legacy company - which now leases party furniture - no longer contests use of images copywritten during it operation prior to 1966. Secondly, and most importantly, the purpose of providing the information illustrates the subject of the article for informational purposes. Finally, while I have no problem with the image being removed after a suitable replacement has been found, to discard the image because a "one size fits all policy" is simply foolish because you remove a valuable reference for those who use the site.

But as I have learned long ago - and one of main reasons that I am no longer a regular contributor - is that Wikipedian are going to do what they are going to do - Frankly had I known that Wikipedia was as it is becoming, I never would have invested the hours of my time in this venture.

So go and do as you will - and while you are at it, could you also go through and nominate all the other images that I have added to the automobile project for deletion as well - they might as well get trashed now, rather then go through the long drawn out process of being killed off one by one. I have better things to do with my time and energy then throw it away here. Stude62 01:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Stude62. --Sherool (talk) 08:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Louisiana regions map.gif

Please look at the image again. I pasted in the e-mail from the university which gave permission to use the image and I think used the appropriate tag to denote that. Aaron charles 18:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Aaron charles. --Sherool (talk) 18:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Photo requested

Re: your recent edits at Seolleongtang: What a novel idea that right after deleting a photo you would immediately add a "photo requested from South Korean Wikipedians" tag to the article's discussion page! Perhaps you could interest your fellow deleters in doing the same; though they are clearly vigorous in regard to their tagging and deleting, they do not appear as skilled in asking for replacements the way you did. Badagnani 07:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Nicholls image problem

Hello there. Just came back from vacation. I saw your message for the image deletion thing but well I was late. Anyways I really don't mind about the deletion, no grudges against you! Thanks for informing me about it. By the way, was it you who put the other craig nicholls picture on my user page from the commons? If it's really you then thanks a lot! Your the first one i've seen uploading substitute images after deleting the originals. And that's a good picture indeed.Victoria Eleanor 15:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Victoria Eleanor. --Sherool (talk) 19:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Uploading Images From A Website

Is it acceptable to upload images of band members from the official website? And if so, what tag would one put on it? -WarthogDemon 00:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:WarthogDemon. --Sherool (talk) 00:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

RFC

As this touches largely on policy interpretations, I was wondering if you could add your thoughts at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Chowbok, if you have a few minutes. Thanks... —Chowbok ☠ 00:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

REGARDING HSV SENATOR SIGNATURE

I UNDERSTAND YOU DELETING PICTURES OF THE ARTICLE HSV Senator Signature BUT THE REASON WHY I CAN'T GET FREE IMAGES IS BECAUSE THE CAR IS SIMPLY TO RARE. I UREGENTLY NEED YOU TO WRITE YOUR OPINION ON THIS MATTER ON MY DISCUSSION PAGE. Senators 01:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Senators. --Sherool (talk) 06:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Santiago's image

Sorry for the late reply. Quickly changed the license thing, mistakenly ticked the wrong box. I'm such a noob.:) Factotum73 02:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Net neutrality

Thanks for "voting" for it :D - cohesion 04:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Since you are in the middle of this by your own admission...

I had an image that I had contested the delete of image deleted by Betacommand without comment in this recent set. I have been involved in the discussions about the use of promotional tagged images at some length in the last two days. I resposted another image to the same page, and it was immediately marked by User:Abu_badali for deletion. The same user then has attacked dozens of images uploaded with a promotional tag in only a few minutes, using the argument that any image marked with a promotional tag should be deleted because it could hypothetically be subsititued with a free image as long as the person is living - in this case many of the images marked were provided by the artists to me directly, inclusing some because no free or even promotional image existed. User:Abu_badali then began marking other images such as CD covers I have posted with the so-called rationale they should be deleted because few pages linked to them, which would delete 99% of the album cover images on Wikipedia, as well as likely 98% of all images. This is an obvious personal attack, and yet another example of editors gone wild, which I am now expected to spend hours contesting every one of these CSD's or have someone destroy hours and hours of legitmate work and Wikipedia page layouts to match. I ask for admin assistance on this issue, please, this type of stuff is getting insane on here. A review of User_talk:Abu_badali, and now comments being posted on my page, indicate this user engages in this kind of behavior on a repeated basis. I have never asked for an Rfc before, but there is certainly a need for one here, in addition to a block. The timing of the original issue might also suggest a sockpuppet relationship between Betacommand and Abu badali. And as a Wikipedia user and professional journalist, is it just me, or is there a motto on Wikipedia that for every person engaging in this kind of attack behavior there are a dozen apologists? Tvccs 11:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay admins and apologists - if there was any question about intent, harassment, legitimacy, use of a CSD bot, etc. regarding User:Abu badali - in the middle of his dozens of CSD requets in a few minute span of my images was an image he deleted from the Cadillac Catera page. This was not an image I'd created, it was a free image from another user and marked as such, it was simply one I'd replaced with a promtionally tagged image at one point, which was then reverted, and which I'd subsequently left alone. Abu badali removed a completely free image from a page, the same type of image used to illustrate hundreds of cars on Wikipedia, using the rationale "23:04, November 27, 2006 Abu badali (Talk | contribs) m (rm purely illustrative use of unfree image per WP:FUC#8)". I am completely sick of this stuff, and of the people that apologize for the type of behavior exhibited by this and similar users. Is there anyone sane that has a bot thay can remove his CSD's? Tvccs 11:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard"

And now I get to offer a clarification/correction - it appears the image that was removed from Cadillac Catera was a second image - not the free image at the top of the page, which I thought was the case as in checking the top image tag, it indicated it was no longer linked to any page, and I thought I was seeing a cached page version which still had the image after deletion. Everything else I stated stands, and that was hopefully the only image I've uploaded without a totally clear source. I'm so glad NOT to be dealing with this. Tvccs 12:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Good faith mistakes? My ass. Tvccs 11:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure why you copied this here. I'll post to the thread on WP:AN if I have anything of relevance to add. --Sherool (talk) 13:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use review

Hi, you have requested a review of the fair use status of Image:Hclplant-udl.jpg, the entry can be found under Wikipedia:Fair use review#24 November 2006. However, you don't seem to participate in the discussion. Why? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC).

Reply posted on User talk:Wimvandorst. --Sherool (talk) 15:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Redlinked Image

Hi! The infobox on Acapulco has a redlink to a gif file (File:Escudodeacapulco.gif). Can you take a peek and see what sort of image was there, and let me know so I can hunt for a replacement, or if you clear same with something appropo, let me know it's been handled. Thanks as always. // FrankB 17:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Afterthought- is there any tool to search out redlinked images-- 'anti-orphaned images' as it were! (I hate redlinks--it makes us look sooooooo cheesy and unprofessional!) Best! -- F

Reply posted on User talk:Fabartus. --Sherool (talk) 19:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry, my bad! I usually check the deletion logs and would have caught a typo I can but hope! I dislike bothering one I know is busy, Busy, BUSY! — but then would have been ignorant on the wider tools query! (dang time crunches, forever and always--but take as a compliment--I know the quality of your knowledge and rely on it!) Thanks again. // FrankB 16:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Speedy Delete Please!

Ongoing edit found this mislinked, but present image Image:Issus01.JPG, which is certainly not fair use! Worse, in at least one place, our text on Issus seems to be at least a near copy. (I'm fixing, but this 'pic' should not be kept!)
  Image redlink was on Battle_of_Issus_(622)
   Best Regards // FrankB 16:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. --Sherool (talk) 10:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Smithsonian Images

Sherool: I hate to keep bugging you, but you have been very helpful with image issues in the past. If you look at Image:Cymophyllus fraserianus.jpg and Image talk:Cymophyllus fraserianus.jpg, you will see what started my fun and games today. Then, if you don't mind reviewing User talk:Angr#Smithsonian Images, you will see a detailed description of my expanded problem. Any thoughts that you have will be greatly appreciated. I am trying to do the right thing, but don't want to act rashly to trash a bunch of work that I have done. --Tlmclain | Talk 16:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Tlmclain + a comment on Image talk:Cymophyllus fraserianus.jpg. --Sherool (talk) 18:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Sherool: Based upon your posted comments, I gather that, since you think the fair use status of Image talk:Cymophyllus fraserianus.jpg is a close call, I should follow the course that I outlined in User talk:Angr#Smithsonian Images with respect to images like Image:Trillium discolor.jpg, i.e., remove the image from all articles and then mark it for speedy deletion with {{db-author}}. --Tlmclain | Talk 19:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Tlmclain. --Sherool (talk) 19:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Sherool: As always, thanks for your help. You help a lot of folks with image issues and it is greatly appreciated.--Tlmclain | Talk 20:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

This Helpful Barnstar is awarded to Sherool for patience with and extraordinary helpfulness provided to Users with respect to all sorts of image issues. Awarded by Tlmclain, 7 December 2006

Category pipe

In this page, I was asking a question: "what does '|Text' means in this content: [[Category:{{{1}}}|TWiStErRob]]". I understand the logics of {{{#}}} (as parameters), I was asking about SomeText in the context: [[Category:SomeCategory|SomeText]], so what are the paramters of Category keyword? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TWiStErRob (talk • contribs) 21:31, 10 December 2006 TWiStErRob 22:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:TWiStErRob. --Sherool (talk) 21:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your answers TWiStErRob 22:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

"replaceability"

The last two images of mine you tagged (Citroen Activa) are of concept cars of which there were probably about two examples made of each (if that). Yes, in theory, it is possible for someone to find where these cars are located and go take a picture of one. Yes, in theory, it is possible for someone who happened to take a non-digital picture of these cars when they were at a motor show in the 1980s/1990s to stumble upon the page and decide they want to upload their picture, find said picture (if they even still have it), scan said picture, and upload it. But is this ever really likely to happen? And that's before we even get into the issue of photograph quality. Deleting all the other promotional images of more mainstream popular cars I uploaded, when they were released for the explicit purposes of illustrating the car in the media (i.e. that's the only reason the pictures EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE), is pointless enough. But deleting ones where there's not a snowball's chance in hell of the image actually being "replaced" is just stupid. I understand Wikipedia needs to be wary of copyright regulations but this wariness should at least be combined with a bit of common sense and discretion. I'll also point out that if I had tagged them as "copyright holder allows use for any purpose" (which is the case for them all, I just don't have written proof of it, and out of respect for Wikipedia's rules tagged them merely as fair use to be on the safe side) noone would bat an eyelid (who knows how many promotional images like this [1] there are out there, evading your detection!). Not that I particularly care anyway, I've completely lost interest in editing Wikipedia since I uploaded them (and the others), which is why I haven't bothered to object to any of the other deletions. So go ahead and delete them; I'm sure all the world leaders will drop everything and call on their peoples to rush out and find a free-licensed picture of an obscure French concept car very few people have even heard of, let alone seen, and henceforth a new picture of incredible, Encyclopedia Britannica-standard quality will be uploaded within hours of my nasty nasty fair use image's deletion. God bless you, and may you perform many more pointless image deletions before you are finally returned to the earth. --Jamieli 18:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Jamieli. --Sherool (talk) 22:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay...no problem. Apologies for the borderline-vitriolic nature of my complaint above, btw...I was irritated for other non-Wikipedic real-life reasons. I'd get into a debate about what I see as the negligible in-practice difference between "the media" and Wikipedia but I can't be arsed. Anyway, thanks for understanding, and sorry again. Peace, --Jamieli 22:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding 115072850515510077.jpg‎ and Toriaezu010.jpg

Hi! I'd like to know which part of the copyright rules "an advertisement poster" is violating? In which way a flyer advertising or promoting a car is different from a flyer/poster showing a movie for example? The way I see it, it's the exactly same thing in both cases; the posters in question are made by the company which owns copyrights for both the poster and products/subjects the poster is showing, and they're meant for free promoting/informational use as-is, meaning you're not allowed to alter them in any way.

Therefore I request help with the license tag I should set for the picture, which tag would you recommend? Wikipedia's list seems to be pretty simple and imperfect so I just improvised with the tag and was surprised Wikipedia recognized my input right away :P

As for the other picture "Toriaezu010.jpg", I know it isn't of completely fair use and I have no way to prove the author stated in his website the pictures weren't copyrighted and were up for viewing only for a short time (some kind of "post a pic of your cars" site). I'll be trying to get a "written" permission for fair use (like that would be a valid provement on the internet?) from the author as wikipedia suggests, anyway. Bob bronx 19:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Bob bronx. --Sherool (talk) 20:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh.. thank you very much for clarifying this matter for me :)

I guess the case is closed then, I've got nothing more to add. Happy christmas!

Image:Arkanoid-space-ball.jpg

In reply to "advertising? how? Tagging as orphanded fair use intead." The image was used in an advertising article which has since been speedy-deleted. I'm not contesting your actions, just clarifying mine. Cheers. --AtD 16:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Jchalker.jpg

Hello, I am the current creator of the image and, since I'm (still) new to wikis, didn't know what to do at first so forgive me if I pressed something wrong. --Phpcoder 6:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Phpcoder. --Sherool (talk) 07:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Smile

Sir james paul has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Template_talk:WPBiography

Hi. I posted several messages on Template_talk:WPBiography and was hoping to get your thoughts on them on that talk page. Thanks. -- Jreferee 16:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Fabolous

A comment has been placed on this article's talk page regarding your edits, which are apparently based on an essay which is marked as neither guideline nor policy. The images add to the article and do seem to be covered under US fair use law (commentary on the subject, noncommercial use, no harm to commercial value). If you still disagree that these images fall under fair use, please feel free to comment, however do please note that "use in another article" is not a criteria in Wikipedia's fair use policy, nor does it have an impact under US Fair Use regulations. Seraphimblade 23:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on Talk:Fabolous. --Sherool (talk) 00:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Strasbourg

Please. Could some administrator help ? There is a user who keeps on turning back history and making Strasbourg a german town again. Apparently, he's been doing this kind of stuff for quite a while on a number of related articles. Enough with this "Deutschland über alles" attitude, i say ! Thanks, RCS 15:07, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:RCS. --Sherool (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, but erasing the mention of french language is pretty over-germanizating for no good purpose : see again and bear in mind he's a self-proclaimed admirer of Otto von Bismarck. I am from Strasbourg, i've written several sections of the article (under my pseudonym or my IP). Cheers RCS 17:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Strasbourg#The German / French name dispute

Hello, i don't know what you think about the story now but please note that User:R9tgokunks has ceased to take part in the discussion. Can we call this a gentleman's agreement ? Cheers, RCS 08:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Untagged image

An image you uploaded, Image:Purdue seal.png, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 13:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Should probably have been tagged as logo, moot point though I see it's been replaced by another version so I'll just delete this as redundant/orphanded. --Sherool (talk) 14:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Though that misunderstanding about the craig nicholls image was kind of confusing, I just wanted to wish you a HAPPY NEW YEAR 2007 and have a greaty time!Victoria Eleanor 13:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

NPWatcher

Hi - thanks for reporting the images issue. I've fixed it in the current release, and it seems to be capable of catching all variants of image inclusion that I tried (see User:Martinp23/sandbox for some of my testing on the issue, as well as WP:NPW, where the image was removed from the infobox). Thanks, and Happy New Year Martinp23 23:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Martinp23. --Sherool (talk) 14:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I'm really sorry about the bother caused by this bug - it turns out that the code I had didn't accept pages in the mainspace (because the xml feed from wikipedia formats them incorrectly), and the regex support was slightly different to the expected. I've just done a new release (0.8.5.1) which fixes the Regex and works in the mainspace, as well as refreshing the web-browser after deletion and greyying out the buttons (something stupid I'd forgotten to add). Martinp23 16:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Martinp23. --Sherool (talk) 21:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, glad to hear it :). About the non-standard capitalisations - I do have that regex n the program, though there are three parts which remove images, so I must have missed it off one of them. Would you be able to give me an example of where it failed, so I can debug it on the same file? Thanks, sorry for the trouble Martinp23 21:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Martinp23. --Sherool (talk) 21:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I've just done another release, and hopefully that'll iron out most of the bugs which have cropped up so far. Thankd ofr your help with the diffs (and reporting). Martinp23 21:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:USS Barbour County (LST-1195).JPG

Happy New Year! Have fielded a question on my talk for Demon71 at this section. Check my answer. Last (xpost note) link is direct to his page if I'm wrong. Thanks very much // FrankB 03:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Replies posted on User talk:Fabartus, User talk:71Demon and Image talk:USS Barbour County (LST-1195).JPG. --Sherool (talk) 09:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I gots to see if there be a barnstar of quickest most efficient worker. Great work this, Great work!
Speedy Gonzalez, the peace maker, I hereby dub thee! Best! // FrankB 14:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I think the designer of the bot got offended when I told him his bot was skipping the tags. It got a little heated, and then he started stalking my photos. Instead of going tit for tat I figured it was better to get an admin involved. I will look into the Commons, I have never used it. Again thanks, so much. I added additional wordage on the other ones he marked. I'm not going to put tags on them in the future, but put where it came from. If somebody else wants to make more work for themselve retagging them, then they are welcome to. Again thanks. --71Demon 20:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Skool, I really hate to bother you

Image:USS Piedmont AD-17.jpg & Image:USS Logan (AP-196).jpeg I put the text in showing they came from the "Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships Office of the Chief of Naval Operations Naval History Division • Washington" With the proper sourcing I removed the tag, since it was no longer relivant. Not sure what I'm doing wrong here. I have been doing research on Navy ships related to WV as well as alot of others over the years. I sometimes goto the National Archives in DC, the Navy Yard in DC, the Mariners Museum outside Norfolk, as well as being in contact with different Museums around the county. I added source of the two photos, now what? I'm begining to think the guy is stalkiing me. --71Demon 20:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:71Demon. --Sherool (talk) 15:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

More Photos

Wikipedia:WikiProject West Virginia/Deletion sorting I was working on our local house and senate members. I looked at the sourcing information on the one of the Governor and our Secretary of state. Using that as reference, I uploaded the photos, and put the source info. I used the GDFL tag, which seem approperate since they were press release photos. Imediately a bot tags the all as unsourced. I message the bot, that it has a glitch as the photos were tagged and sourced. I get back a message it is not a bot, Opps, from User:Mecu and I explained that these other older photos are sourced the same, and wanted to know what he is looking for. I get no response from him, but suddenly the photo of the governor and secretary of state are labled the same. I believe this guy is not being vindictive, because that was uncalled for. Thanks --71Demon 17:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:71Demon. --Sherool (talk) 02:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Template which you deleted

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Template:MontenegroFairUse. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 03:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Posted a comment on Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 January 24. --Sherool (talk) 09:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

A small request

Hi Sherool, I would appreciate if you could help me on a small image related issue. The Image:1965ssg.jpg cites an unaccessible and unreliable source per WP:IUP. It is currently used in Special Service Group. I added a new picture Image:SSG Pakistan.jpg and gave the fairuse rationale. Please check this issue. Thanks --Falcon007 05:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I would also like to ask that what is wikipedia policy regarding images taken from tripod and geocities user pages and then puting them on controversial pages to prove a case? I would again request you to see Image:1965ssg.jpg and check its reliability. It doesn't provide anthing about who took it, when and where, from any reliable and authentic source other than personal page. Since this picture is cited as a historical reference to a point I would ask you to please have a look at it. Thanks and I would appreciate your help. --Falcon007 10:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Falcon007. --Sherool (talk) 17:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

I just wanted to thanks for your speedy response to my question over at the Village pump. Have a great week! Chupper 17:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Holy crap!

		The Editor's Barnstar
		You're a fairuse deletion dynamo! In the time it took me to get rid of eight images, you killed like 40! That's insane! Have a barnstar. ♠PMC♠ 21:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Europe Map

Thanks for getting the map to work. I couldn't figure out what was wrong. I'll try the same thing with my other SVGs that aren't working. Thanks. --Sbrools ^{(talk . contribs)} 04:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Comic Book Cover Fair Use

Hello Sherool, I understand that new user User:Memeich did not provide the fair use rationale, source information and appropriate tags for the images in Michael Netzer. Image:Mtu101 sm.jpg and Image:Huntress2_sm.jpg should have been tagged with fair use for comic book covers which I see is common practice for such use. Image:Lifestory1.jpg is an original image that I provided for free use at Wikipedia under Creative Commons, or any other appropriate licence. This image has never been published elsewhere aside from my own website. Is it possible to restore them providing the source information and proper fair use rationales are supplied? I've provided the source information for Image:Mnetzer.jpg‎, which you marked for speedy deletion, and removed the NSI tag. Can it be removed from this deletion process now? With thanks, MichaelNetzer 23:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks much for the comments. The article is lacking in a mention or two of the artistic contribution to the medium as a comic book artist. Seems sensible to remedy that first and then add an image or two accordingly. You also caused me to become more familiar with image uploading and tagging, which smoothes out a rough edge. Thanks again. MichaelNetzer 12:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

thanks for the signature help! Oh, yeah, soon you will see me with a different signature. It will probably be yellow or pink or blue. LOL! ♥Smartie960♥ (talk with me!) 21:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC) Hello again! ♥Smartie960♥ (Chatter Box) 22:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC) Do you like it?

Reply posted on User talk:Smartie960. --Sherool (talk) 00:48, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

About the reply: Ok, I think I am going to take your advice. I am a first time Wikipedia user, so I do not know much about it. Do you have anymore tips for starters?

♥Smartie960♥ (Chatter Box) 14:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Alstom Metropolis.jpg

Sherool: acabo de ver esta imagen para el Santo Domingo Metro en google, hace falta, conseguite las licensias y permisos y montala que esta barbara! – Moebiusuibeom 02:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

In English in case, get that image lagally and load it – Moebiusuibeom 02:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Moebiusuibeom (I hope, didn't understand half of that). --Sherool (talk) 07:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, message was ment for User:EdwinCasadoBaez and Santo Domingo Metro – Translation; …awesome image, get correct license and or permission and place! – Moebiusuibeom 20:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Bytte brukernavn

Hei!

Jeg vil gjerne bytte brukernavnet mitt på engelsk wikipedia til EivindB, slik at det stemmer med mitt norske brukernavn. Jeg er nå innlogget på engelsk wikipedia. Brandt & EivindB, norwegian wikipedia.

Reply posted (in Norwegian) on User talk:Brandt. --Sherool (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		This is awarded to Sherool for being so kind to help people out in Wikipedia, people like me. ♥Smartie960♥ (Chatter Box) 15:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use Images

You've been deleting some of the images I used in the article I have been making for my school. Fair enough, good reason. I was just wondering:

1. Is it not fair use if I am only using it to illustrate the new buildings in the school and it is
   1. Only being used for informational purposes.
2. What proof is required if I have consent from the school? Would I need to ask a headteacher or email the school office?

— Skixz 15:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Skixz. --Sherool (talk) 15:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Bright Idea Award

Bright Idea Award For conceiving of a "needs-photo" WPBiography template parameter , you are hereby awarded the Bright Idea Award. -- Jreferee 19:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I read your post a while ago and after tagging many articles as part of the WPBiography assessment drive, I realize just how great of idea you had. Thank you. -- Jreferee 19:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Picture requests/Requests

Hi Sherool, I just wanted to make sure, you see this. Please consider using Commons:Template:Notify me on your Commons talk or user page. --Flominator 14:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Sherool (talk) 23:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Revived discussion concerning fair use in portals

I am contacting everyone who participated in the discussion that became inactive in December. Due to the length of the previous discussion, I have proposed a new amendment and you like you to weigh in so that we may actually have a consensus on this matter as it doesn't seem there exists one either way. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria

Would it be possible

To tell me whether this deleted image [2] is the same as or similar to [3]? Cheers. Nil Einne 20:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Nil Einne. --Sherool (talk) 22:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Restore a user subpage

Can you please restore this user subpage for me? Thanks in advance, Zachary ^talk 20:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:ZJH. --Sherool (talk) 20:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Please watchlist this

Hey there Girl!

re: this edit to allow some time on the licensing clarification and please see your email on same. This is one of the editors under me wings as big bird! <g> Thanks! // FrankB 22:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Fabartus. --Sherool (talk) 09:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi, sorry about the late reply I got distracted by other things. As far as I can see this has already been "resolved" by the user requesting the deletion of the image in question.

On a general note: Good question about how to deal with offline permission letters, there is not rely any "snail mail" entry into the ORTS system that I know off. I guess scanning such a letter and e-mail it to the permissions adress described at WP:COPYREQ, or maybe send it straight to the foundation office using the postal adress at foundation:Contact us and hope someone there have the time to process things like that... --Sherool (talk) 09:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry back at you! (Since I was missing all together yesterday, my late is later than your late, so <sticking tounge out cheekily> take that! <g>(with thanks!)
  1) Actually add an apology from here--I should have also posted "forget this", struck it through, or some such modification, on your talk -- not just sending the second email showing that decision to {db-author} that when Beth realized the scope of the license concerns didn't match her use document. Sigh! I was in email mode, alas, not WP mode--iirc, I was trying to get free of the computer shackles and go to make dinner for the family. I'm married to a Tax CPA, which means I be a single parent this time O'year every year! I'm a pretty good cook, but between that and playing taxi-Dad it cuts into late day wiki-time during these three months. (To add insult to injury, now I have to start teaching the second teen to drive and add those grey-hairs upon my head! And those multiply for a while!
  2) Wha!?? Yer keyboard doesn't have a scan snailmail and e-transmit button? We'll have to complain to someone--mine doesn't either! <G> Thanks. // FrankB 14:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello!

My name is Jaromir. Unfortunately, we cannot have a longer conversation due to irrational actions by the user called Michaelas10. He is not an advocate. The reverts should be done by you if you do not wish my message at your discussion page, shouldn't they? Welcome to read the discussion history page. Can we talk at my discussion page, please? --Riva72 17:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Image copyright issues for dummies

Do you have any objections to moving that page to Wikipedia:Basic copyright issues or something similar? I always want to send people to it, but I never do because I think they will get more angry. discussion here :) - cohesion 00:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Cohesion. --Sherool (talk) 05:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Unnecessarily disappearing images

I doubt I can change your mind, but I'm really not happy to see all these non-replaceable fair use images being deleted day after day. I've read the discussions, and I don't see any legal threat posed by fair use promotional images, not to Wikipedia. As for third party commercial use, that's up to end users to worry about. I'd call it vandalism if you weren't an admin. :( - dtfinch 21:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Dtfinch. --Sherool (talk) 23:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Whenever a photo of a japanese idol is licensed for free commercial use, 99% of the time it ends up on sex toys and in fake child-porn. I don't think they'll ever agree to Wikipedia's new terms to promote this type of usage, so their pages will just be portrait-less until the policy is relaxed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dtfinch (talk • contribs) 00:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

Undelete :-)

Hey, can you please undelete Image:Windows_Vista_logo.svg? I'm going to try and fix it so it can be used in articles, now that I know more about SVG. :-) — Alex^(T|C|E) 11:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've undeleted Image:Windows Vista logo.svg for now. There is some debate over wheter or not SVG images are acceptable for fair use (since it's easy to achieve good print quality with vector graphics), but I guess it won't hurt to let you take a swing at improving it untill some kind of consensus is reached. --Sherool (talk) 14:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll try to get the image fixed soon. — Alex^(T|C|E) 07:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Military-Insignia

Template:Military-Insignia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. —xyzzy_n 21:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Image:GirlMorph.jpg

Bastard! I was just about to change the license and I've lost the original file (I created this years ago and was putting it here for safe keeping :-p ) gujamin 02:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC) you and your delete trigger-happyness :-p

Reply posted on User talk:Gujamin. --Sherool (talk) 12:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

cat yawning image

I have a lengthy response on my talk page.DreamGuy 18:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

snail kite

I don't think I tagged it as fair use, I thought it was pd when I uploaded. Anyway, since I've had self-made images deleted without warning in the past (because the tagging system changed), I won't lose sleep from this one. The last image I had deleted was a Yellow Warbler uploaded from the USFWS photo library, which used to be pd. jimfbleak 15:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Your edit

I just wanted to share with you that this is one of the stupidest edits I've ever seen. Evidently, no claimed copyright holder had complained about the copyright status of the image, but you felt the need to remove it and replace it with - nothing at all! Did it occur to you that this might be a bad thing (TM)? Samsara (talk • contribs) 20:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply posted on User talk:Samsara. --Sherool (talk) 22:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)