Please reverse your deletion

Would you please reverse the deletion of Category talk:Wikipedians who say CfD needs more diverse participants. It is a test of wikipedian behaviour. It has been said that the talk page of a category is a place that next to no one will ever find. The fact that it is the talk page of a relink single member category is merely part of the details. It is not a "test page" as per G2.

Please do tell me how you came to discover the page? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, Wikipedia:Database reports/Orphaned talk pages! Thanks for the answer. probably that's the end of the experiment. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monobook Deletion

Thanks..!!!When I placed deletion tag on it, it would not appear.Good riddance.. :) arun talk 09:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Curly Howard in Malace in the Palace

Why did you delete this image? It is not from the film and it is a composite of 2 photographs from the production.

File:MaliceInThePalace.jpg - F3 - improperly licensed as {{PD-self}} - deleted 18 Nov.

Image:CurlyMalice.jpg - F3 - improperly licensed as {{PD-self}} - deleted 19 Nov, removed from article at same time. You re-uploaded it on November 24 with the appropriate license. Skier Dude (talk) 04:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to come in but is Image:CurlyMalice.jpg a screenshot or a blown up part of the standard publicity image [1]. ? Just seem strange that somebody would take a screen shot at exactly the same moment that was used for the publicity images. MilborneOne (talk) 12:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That scene was never used in the film. These are photographs from the production. Lou72JG (talk) 20:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Image:CurlyMalice.jpg does have artifacts & blur that make it seem to be indicative of a screenshot, as opposed to a cropping of the much better quality [2]. However, but Lou72JG has now just seemingly has contradicted himself - is the wiki image a "photographs from the production" or a screenshot? Skier Dude (talk) 02:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at this deleted file

Per this log I see that you deleted File:Visalia, CA.jpg for lack of permission. IIRC, I tagged the original image and both you (once) and I (twice) recently tagged the replacement image File:Visalia Infobox.jpg for lack of permission but the tag has been removed each time. Is this the same image with the same info? The issue, as I see it, is that the uploader is not the person who is claimed to be the source or author and besides the uploader adding a licence another editor Gemini818, who looks like a WP:SPA or maybe a sock, added some licence info but always without any evidence of permission. I would like to formally nominate it for deletion but want to confirm the previous image was the same or has similar info. Thanks. ww2censor (talk) 14:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check out my note at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Visaliaguy - rather than tackling these one by one, as soon as the puppet investigation is closed I'm going to start a Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations listing, as some of the license changes were very suspect. Skier Dude (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to piece together that damn SPI had me staring at some of those images, and staring and staring... I'm not even sure why; in 1-2 cases it might have been because an uploaded one had appeared in an edit by an IP, which is just weird and why a a couple low-count IPs might have been on my list. I was so tired by the end I can't even remember completely, I'm sorry. Actually that was my first SPI report at all so I'm surprised you and the clerk admin made sense of what I included without anything more required.

One in particular though just made my head hurt. It had been gone, then back, or renamed, then a second version added or, just, strange... I think it was eventually they got through via bulk "forum shopping" on patrols for images, or via really cruel nonsense like that (←) montage picture that VISTALA changed from Vistala's version had inexplicably removed 9 width and 10 height pixels which dropped the size 1.06K; can I take it the filter for "same version" is <1K? I google image searched that thing to death, any image by those sizes, slightly different ratios, other generic city pictures. I think my end opinion on that was the top and center-left were yanked from elsewhere, the bottom was possibly self-taken, and the center-right looks like a shot taken from some kind of city downtown webcam but obviously no proof. I then realized I'd wasted 45 minutes on just that and that I didn't even need to talk about the pictures to make the report more than deep enough. Only then did I notice how ridiculously long I'd taken to research since I was winging the whole SPI on the spot (for the ANI originally, actually) and I'm far too ashamed to confess on actual time. Strangely, I seem to get a 1hr++ case of some sort by accident every night. As long as the SPI is helpful for anything instead of a glorified working permit to deconstruct all the related articles, then the time was worth it. I already know there's some copied text from various placed in the about 30 articles that need AfDs or merging, and duck/gut check gave me the impression that some of the house pictures were taken from real estate listings.

Would you like any generic info on articles even if I'm just giving them copy edit treatment? If so, what info, or is it to your liking to somehow magically rearrange the contents into black magic? Well, you're an admin so I guess you also get the advantage of looking at deleted article histories, too, even if I nominate them to be banished. Oooh, I hate that rollbackers don't have that... it'd help so much on a user research to look for content MOs. *Ahem*! Right, let me know if I can help in any way, but I get the feeling you're probably already on top of it. Rambling this much means need more sleep. Cheers~ ♪ daTheisen (talk) 22:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd hold off on doing anything with the text additions right now... When someone is listed on Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations both the article/text additions and the image uploads/changes are checked. So, lets let the sock investigation go through first, and then move forward with the investigations. Skier Dude (talk) 22:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! I knew why I should have known better but forgot it anyway. Not so much fun if editors could toy with things in a current investigation. It might be a good spectator sport, but not so good for quality or study. I don't see why I'd want to change evidence in a case that could only be eventual entertainment for me, anyway :) It is good to know the policy for your new taskforce though, and I find the idea of what you're collecting to be most interesting. A lot of the text under this case looked incredibly subtle though, and without an overlord type of reference to look back at will probably be a challenge. Google can't solve quite everything just yet.

Oh, one question though-- should the things that get marked as pending CCI combover be given a noindex on the assumption of possible violation and don't want them as returnable search results to reduce traffic and keep away from mirrors, or do we assume the article is innocent until proven guilty for CCI; even if it was in process for or already approved for deletion in the mainspace? Rather, a CCI tagging puts an article on indefinite "pause", but does its existence get covered up temporarily pending review? That I could work with, and give some estimation on the article's status for after your cleansing I could decode its backlinks ahead of time for easier later changes or justify deletion. .....Oh and if I'm spouting off gibberish, I apologize. I just have a very strange trigger finger for getting my hands on articles from BLPs, SPAs, socks and recently blocked/banned users to see what damage there might be and may or may not be fixable if rubbish, and since I put the report for the mess up myself it's like fresh meat to me. ♪ daTheisen (talk) 00:09, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you've picked up some really egregious text violations, you might want to tag the article as such & add the noindex tag. Otherwise, I don't see the harm in waiting a day or two for things to get started in a coordinated way. Skier Dude (talk) 00:14, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Visaliaguy verdict is in!

As header says, awaited results have been through CU and judgment passed. I caught 5.5/9 including all named users I listed, covering 90-95%+ of the content. As such, all the biggest offenders handled, so you should have tons to work with. Even easier is that with only a few exceptions all the contributions are just in that narrow field so things I'd think would get more clear as you go along. I'll check in at the project mid-week :) ♪ daTheisen (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on the admin side of it, then move on to the cleanup... Skier Dude (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You guys were quick; I go out for dinner and don't get back here for a day! Should I tag any images I see that seem to be questionable? Some of VISALIAso559's images look ok because they have metadata. Should I leave these alone? Cheers ww2censor (talk) 04:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, go ahead and start tagging! I did note, if I remember correctly, that some of the metada didn't jive - improbable times (i.e. a picture claiming to be from 2000 but taken last week), different cameras, etc. It would be good to see if there's a base/standard camera & then use that to eliminate those that don't fit the "pattern". Keeping notes somewhere would be helpful, until the CCI is done. I'll get to that sometime tonight. Skier Dude (talk) 04:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you happen to notice these uploads on the commons? Do you think there is a connection? BTW, I'm watching so no need to post on my talk page. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 05:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen so many pics of that city - :-0 -> I don't remember if this matched one of the older ones- any clue? Skier Dude (talk) 06:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non Free Reduce

There are two lists here that need attention - User:Sfan00_IMG/LARGE_Fair_use User:Sfan00_IMG/Large_Fair_use_Images_-_October_23,_2009

Don't forget to remove entries once they have been reduced to a suitable size :)

Items in strike thru have been tagged for reduction, but at time of checking had not been reduced.

Thanks :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Workington Bridge Image Removed

Please clarify why you removed an image from Workington page. It was to illustrate the siting of the new Mill Field Bridge and not just for decoration!! (82.132.139.162 (talk) 22:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Image summary stated; "Educational and personal not-for-profit reproduction welcomed. Reproduction for profit by local schools and charities welcomed. All other forms of reproduction for profit will involve an appropriate charge." (emphasis added) The restriction of the last sentence means that this image is not usable on Wikipedia as it limits the Creative commons license. Skier Dude (talk) 03:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

new to wikipedia

I'm doing a project for a class and I am having trouble adding images you and others have deleted them because of copyright but I'm getting them from flicker and they say there are Creative Commons Creative Commons License Deed Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0 Generic

that as long as I post the attributions link that I can use them for non commercial use. and this is educational can u help me with this? do I need to put some other code? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mel45 (talk • contribs) 09:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh So Cosmo Logo

Thanks for your help putting up the Oh So Cosmo logo Skier Dude! I'm having the same issue with the group photo of the Oh So Cosmo crew. Can you help? It's a fair use photograph taken by David Leyes for which Corus Entertainment owns all the rights. It is the official Season 1 group photo of Josie Dye, Wilder Weir and Jacqui Skeete and I have permission to post it. Thanks in advance! CosmoGirl Toronto 15:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CosmoGirl Toronto (talk • contribs)

Photo of Nazam Tabatabai

I humbly request that I have a photo of Syed Ali Haider Tabatabai, the image is my property I inherited it from my parents, both were grand children of Nazam Tabatabai, one of my grand father was Nazam Tabatabai's son and the other was his son in Law either of them had taken it or whatever, it is one of the very few pictures taken of him. I wish donate it to your encylopedia keeping my right to publish it else where also, let me assure you no body is going to challange you for copyright of this image. Please tell me how can I upload it without getting entangled into your most bewildering user interfaces i.e. GUIs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baabi 99 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Orphaned non-free image (File:JBoss by Red Hat.jpg)

Hi Skier Dude,

Thank you for your message regarding the image I uploaded. It is orphaned because I could not get it to load to the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JBoss_(company). Is this because the company information (upper right of page) is set up in the "defunct company" template? We're not completely defunct, we were acquired but still use the JBoss brand. I recently updated the page content and would like to add the logo if possible. I'm new to editing Wikipedia so any guidance you can provide is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beantowngal (talk • contribs) 21:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out that File:NCT building of Tech College.jpg may not conform to requisite licence as it is replaceable. Please delete this file.Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Temashibo (talk • contribs) 16:31, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another double check

Hey again. Could you Jxc5 and me out and take a look at the final(ish) outcome here? I'm fairly confident nearly all of it has been taken care of, but the licenses on the images mentioned in the final post there aren't correct and I don't think I could explain it nor the proper course of action to take as well as you might. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned JBoss logo

Hello again,

Thanks for the help with my page. The logo currently on the JBoss (company) page is outdated and I was trying to update it with the new one. However, the image I uploaded is too large so I'm just going to delete it. Once I have a smaller image I'll try again and will indicate on that image that it is to replace an old one. Thanks again! Beantowngal (talk) 19:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of tibet

It is my own work and i did it by using photoshop , so how do i provide permission to myself?

--Race911 (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Race911[reply]

FOP

While patrolling some new images I come across many new images uploaded for what I now know to be the part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia Saves Public Art!. The issue is that some of these editors have been uploading images of modern US sculptures which are obviously derivative images of copyright works because there is no freedom of panorama for sculptures in the US per Commons:COM:FOP. I have tried to discuss this with some, with some success in some instances, but others just revert my deletion notices. In one instance I have been able to reduce the image use down from 10 to one image with a good fair-use rationale and lower resolution file. I had tagged some images for speedy deletion as copyright violations but between my tagging and an admin review the editor added a fair-use rationale to each of about 10 images, so the admin refused the speedy. Several of the images are also hosted on the commons, some as duplicates and those I have found have been nominated there, some have already been deleted.

I started a review of the articles linked in Template:IUPUIPublicArt which seems like the best listing of the articles in question that suffer from the FOP issue and got about halfway through it, putting the details on a new page User:Ww2censor/FOP statues. Most of the images should be deleted even if they have fair-use rationales because they will fail at least one or more of the NFCCs; minimal and gallery use, significance. Do we really have to go through the formal nomination process for each on at IfD or can we group them together as a bulk nomination? I don't know how to do that.

I thought it would be a good idea to post some FOP details as to what is acceptable and what is not. Would you agree with that and can you assist with the valid deletions? Goodness, I now realise tidying up after such projects, by newbie and uninformed editors, can be quite a task. RichardMcCoy, the coordinator has FOP problems with some of his images specifically the Lincoln images maybe others due to when artist died, but I have not even addressed that yet. Any suggestions to help me work through this more quickly? Any help you can give is welcome.

We should probably review the edits of all these Wikipedia|Saves Public Art members. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 05:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you've made a good start with User:Ww2censor/FOP statues. It appears that there's multiple images in the list that can simply be tagged as "orphaned fair use" (i.e. 6 of the 7 at Anatomy Vessel (Saplings) and the same # for Casey Stengel (sculpture). I think that might be the easiest way to go - cleanup the article page & ORFUD the rest of them. This sub-page might be the easiest way to go through them... just make notes at the appropriate places to see if there's others that might be interested in helping (I'll pick up the size reductions later). Thoughts? Skier Dude (talk) 04:56, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will continue as I am going with the list but have received decent response from some of the editors and their coordinator who has posted some notes in addition to which I posted these instructions so we shall see if there are any editors who revolt. Fingers crossed. I think I am done with the commons images so far. Thanks for whatever you can do. ww2censor (talk) 05:05, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the work. I have updated the worksheet, tagged some more images and IfD'd this group as a single nomination. Hopefully that format works, so there are not a load of individual noms. I am done for now and will wait for the redlinks to appear, then review the individual editors' remaining uploads. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 16:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maxey Flat groundwater data.

I'm a little late getting to this. The image was deleted some time ago from what I can tell. It was a scan I made of a groundwater contamination study that's in the Superfund archive near the Maxey Flat Low Level Radioactive Waste site. They have two archives, actually. One is in the Flemingsburgh Public Library and the other is in the library at Morehead State. I scanned mine from the Public Library. The later groundwater sampling was done by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, but the one I posted is from an EPA-funded study that was part of the Superfund program. I'm pretty sure all that stuff from the federal archive is available for public reproduction. If not I'm really sorry, but I thought that's the way it worked.

R. Jackson (talk) 07:50, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you're referring to both File:Maxey groundwater.jpg and File:2002 MaxeyFrmSoutheast.jpg. Can you supply the name of the specific books that they were taken from - ISBN would be really helpful to prove the fact they're EPA-related and would be eligible for the {{PD-USGov}}. We need to be able to trace it back to the government source to justify/support the USGov template. Skier Dude (talk) 05:06, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's not really a collection of books with ISBN numbers. It's a bunch of three-ring 2" white notebooks containing whatever papers didn't fall through the cracks when the facility was changing hands. The EPA established the archives when they were doing their remediation studies. So some of the stuff is sourced to federal agencies and some to state agencies. Some comes from the original private contractor, which I'd like to put up, but obviously can't. There's quite a bit of CDC stuff in the archives. I actually followed up on the CDC stuff and went to interview the author, a Dr. Paul Charp, at the CDC in Atlanta. BTW, MaxeyFrmSoutheast.jpg was taken by a photographer from the Commonwealth of Kentucky, so it doesn't fall under the federal umbrella. I don't actually know exactly what Kentucky's stance is on their documents. I've had quite a bit of trouble getting documents from Kentucky and never have had a straight story as to why. I asked for water contamination studies the first time I visited their labs and my liaison said, "Well, it's not something we're prepared to let just anyone see." I went through their state legislature and still didn't get anywhere, although I was repeatedly assured that if I filled out all the forms I'd get copies of the documents I was asking to see. The documents I did get from the Commonwealth came from disgruntled employees anonymously. The requests never worked. SO...I wouldn't have posted any of Kentucky's water contamination documents (not with an expectation of them staying up, anyway). The table I uploaded, Maxey groundwater.jpg, is a scan of an EPA water contamination study that was done as part of Dr. Paul Charp's health impact study for the CDC. I don't have any kind of reference ID number from the archive, though. I just scanned a page out of a 3-ring notebook.

R. Jackson (talk) 08:31, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please see if you received the email at permissions-enwikimedia.org.

Thanks, Aartich (talk) 23:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Orphaned Images

Hi,

Would you mind letting me know how I can add the images to our Wikipedia site which is in my sandbox? My department (IMD World Competitiveness Center) has created the images and we would like them to appear on our wikipage.

Thanks

IMD-WCC (talk) 09:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Cover2010.jpg Thanks for uploading File:Cover2010.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 08:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:WCClogo.gif Thanks for uploading File:WCClogo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 08:26, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:IMD-WCC" Hidden categories: User talk pages with Uw-coi notices

Thanks

Hey Skier Dude, just wanted to drop a thank you for dealing with "Mkjhgvgnb bn bbb lambs 12 helped oncedddd", left me baffled for a while. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 03:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shortcut

Clearly I am doing something dozy as you have now deleted Wikipedia talk:CDADR twice. Its supposed to be a shortcut for Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC. Can you explain what is going on...? Ben Mac Dui 11:56, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attje Museum

I took the picture in the museum (photographs without flash were allowed). I uploaded it because I wanted to encourage others to visit the museum. Sylwia Ufnalska (talk) 13:14, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:XX-century monarchs

Hi. I'm not sure it's such a great idea to delete these cat. They seem like a decent parent category for things like Category:16th-century monarchs in Europe. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 00:23, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

U1 deletion

Thanks bro.
-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 07:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Low-emissions locomotives

Could you please remove this category from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working, this is NOT the same as the version that was deleted by the unannounced (no CfD tag ever placed on the cat) discussion here. I recreated the cat, addressing the issue discussed on the CfD page, but had it deleted yet again by CydeBot. I have recreated it yet again, but would like to at least let the cat see the light of day before the bot blindly follow orders and empties and deletes it a 3rd time. Thank you for your time. (message sent to you, as you seem to be the most active admin at this late hour tonight). WuhWuzDat 07:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind,looks like I missed you by 2 minutes, and a minute after I made the request, the bot blindly destroyed it a 3rd time...sigh...."It vuz chust followink ohdahs"....why do I bother? WuhWuzDat 07:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:thecurran#Orphaned non-free image File:NG-KN.jpg

I finished User:Andrwsc's 2009-11-25T06:38:21 edit of Kano State, (rm image from title of infobox, belongs in body), and removed your tag on File:NG-KN.jpg. Thank you for notifying before deleting.

Warmest Regards, :)--thecurran let it off your chest 10:02, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"File:BrisbaneLionsDesign.svg"

Hi S-Diddy,
My first attempt at using Inkscape, and just a plain old fail, and nothing epic about it, noways, nohow. The use of unnecessary force in deleting the image "BrisbaneLionsDesign.svg" has been approved.
--Shirt58 (talk) 10:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free images File:Valid-xhtml10.png & File:Vcss.png

Thanks for your note on these fair use images. Another editor replaced them with SVG versions, orphaning the original images, so you can go ahead and delete them as "non-contentious". - Ahunt (talk) 12:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PHI logo

Hi

The PHI logo was created by myself by hand-drawing the image in a bitmap editing program. It's the original Logo of PHI and does not use any existing typefaces or fonts.

I don't know how to edit the copyright tags.

Perhaps someone can do this for me.

Yhe copyright is in my name.

Thanks

Jacques van Zyl —Preceding unsigned comment added by JacquesPHI (talk • contribs) 16:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:H&B logo.gif

Hello Skier Dude, you recently put up File:H&B logo.gif for deletion.

I have re added this fair use logo to its original article: Holland & Barrett. I think that the image was removed by a possible vandal and had not been restored. As seen here: [3]

Tsange ^►talk 18:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing File:McGuff Company Inc.png was removed by you, but why? I have asked 4 times but have not been responded to, do I take this silence to indicate that I simply upload it again? I responded to you and showed good faith by replying favorably to all your concerns, but am simply ignored

Editing File:McGuff Company Inc.png was removed by you. Here it is again: Howdy, I answered your query on my page regarding the image you stated that it was not in use and I answered that it was in use and provided the link to where it was in use. You did not respond, but days later deleted the image anyway. I do not understand, I responded positively to your query and met the criteria as you stated... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lavath/MyTestMcGuff Lavath —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavath (talk • contribs) 18:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sugarlover

Hi, Skier Dude. I noticed that you indef blocked User:Sugarlover101 back in October. It looks like User:LoadMeUp101 is the same person. Should that user be blocked as well? Powers ^T 00:09, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything in LoadMeUp's block log, and LoadMeUp has edited many times since the un-autoblock request was denied. Am I missing something? Powers ^T 14:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're busy; just wanted to re-ping you on this. LoadMeUp is still editing. Powers ^T 13:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, please remove File:Location of Jinyang New District within Guiyang (China).png

Skier Dude,

Please remove the old obsolete file: File:Location of Jinyang New District within Guiyang (China).png

Thanks for your attention to the file. It is a file that I derived from another fair use file on wikipedia. Since uploading it, I have created another (superior) file and wish to remove the old one. However, I know that I was sloppy about not putting up the copyright status in the beginning, and will avoid that in the future.

Also, is there a way that I can delete a file that I have uploaded without bothering an admin?

Thanks,

Expatscribe (talk) 02:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

about File: Location of Jinyang New District within Guiyang (China).png

Skier Dude,

My friend expatscribe was editing on my computer and I sent you a message through his account by mistake. I (user:dcabirac) created the file from one I derived, and wish to delete it.

Please remove the old obsolete file: File:Location of Jinyang New District within Guiyang (China).png Thanks for your attention to the file. It is a file that I derived from another fair use file on wikipedia. Since uploading it, I have created another (superior) file and wish to remove the old one. However, I know that I was sloppy about not putting up the copyright status in the beginning, and will avoid that in the future. Also, is there a way that I can delete a file that I have uploaded without bothering an admin? Thanks, Dcabirac (talk) 02:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo wildblue.gif

In regards to that file, you may go ahead and remove it as it serves no purpose (now). It was used two months ago, though, but the article got merged and left the little orphan behind. :-) --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 04:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Skier Dude. You have new messages at ArcAngel's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

crowned portcullis image

Noticed you tagged my image.

The image in question became orphaned due to an anonymous edit by someone else on the only page it was used on.

I created it by making a minor color tweak to the black one, if that helps. Opened up the raw SVG of the black one and hand edited the hexcode from black to dark green to match the green on the House of Commons page for the UK.

Checking with the UK's government site seems to confirm that copyright requirements are met.

At the moment I'm confident that fair use is met, the only question is what color the logo should be.

Do you have any advice?

The image itself is easy enough to recreate from the black logo so I'm not worried about deletion. Though it would be nice to know what the right color should be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shentino (talk • contribs) 06:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shentino (talk) 06:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice edit/revert

Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment with the page User talk:Skier Dude. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Nice work ... and for a related humorous incident, look here. Cheers
-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 07:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Add Copyright Tag

As you rightly pointed out the image has no copyright tag. Since i am a new user i dont know how to add the copyright tag. I guarantee that the image uploaded by me is under my ownership and there is no copyright violation. I would love if you can guide me on adding the copyright tag.

Thanks in advance.

Ravi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krzy32 (talk • contribs) 12:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:LubuntuLogo.png

Thanks for your note on this fair use image. Another editor replaced it with an SVG version, orphaning the original image, so you can go ahead and delete it as "non-contentious". - Ahunt (talk) 13:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neath Athletic AFC.gif

My image is licensed correctly. But, Neath Athletic AFC.png is not licensed correctly. Delete Neath Athletic AFC.png and keep mine. Thanks because you didn't saw that.--Ionutzmovie (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (GalaXseeds)

Thanks for deleting the unneeded images. I've changed the logo a couple time but completely forgot to remove the old ones from Commons. Sorry to have given you additional work and thanks again. Chealar (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

File permission problem with File ...

I am not sure I understand your point: I have specifically selected pictures for which the author had attached a cc share alike license and added the URL of the page where it was stated... So what more am I supposed to do? Best, Cresus22 (talk) 19:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Orphaned non-free image File:Crazy Bones logo.jpg

The image page specifies which article it was to be used in. Viewing the article would have revealed that there is a broken image link on the page– I suspect the only reason the image wasn't there is because of vandalism/human error. I have removed your speedy delete tag.

Thanks,

Frazzydee|✍ 20:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hamidiye pic

Hamidiye3.jpg picture was tagged for deletion due to copy right issues as I understand it. 1-I thought I had indicated that it was a historically significant picture, already in PD and I assumed fair use 2- Picture is at least 95 years old. Ships were interned after armistice. 3- I have specific and explicit permission from the web site owner where I found it [4] 4- The picture is significant and adds value because its a rare instance of these two very famous battleships appearing in the same frame. Please help me straighten this out. I do not even know how to add a new form or edit it. Thanks.--Murat (talk) 02:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This is the source: http://www.turkeyswar.com/navy/battleships-hamidiye.htm. I have been in communication with the owner named here and has his written approval.--Murat (talk) 04:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are dude and a scholar. Thanks.--Murat (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollosmokes =

Rollosmokes (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), to whom you sent a notification, was indef'd and has not entered anything under that ID since October of 2008.[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

just making sure ...

hello Skier Dude, and apologies for having to ask but i'm responding to this notification; the image was not really orphaned, it's just that the article was vandalized, and it's now been reverted. does that mean the image is now safe from being deleted, or do i need to do something further to ensure its safety? the image is pretty important to the article, so if there are futher steps i'd be grateful to be informed what they are. thanks Sssoul (talk) 08:39, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the reply and for removing the deletion notice. Sssoul (talk) 06:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

request

Charmingsridhar (talk) 08:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC) Please delete the image File:Roshini Singer Photo1.jpg.. It is no longer needed.ThanksCharmingsridhar (talk) 08:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello New Betacommandbot

Oi, stop spamming my talk page LOL! You nuisance you! Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 11:18, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Towards Design In Poetry.jpg

SD, one of you Wikiwels uploads File:Towards Design In Poetry.jpg as pos unfree but it doesnt appear on the relevant page Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 16. Does it have to be re-listed ? MilborneOne (talk) 12:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, relisting now. Skier Dude (talk) 05:21, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: File:Delrina-OpusNBill-BrainSaver.jpg

Hello there:

I noticed that you flagged this as being an orphaned free-use image.

I must have deleted the reference when working on the Delrina article, meaning to put it back latter. I have just finished adding it back to that article.

Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 16:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CSD tagging

Careful, this had a source. Regards, —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 08:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It happens to the best of us. :-) Regards, —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 08:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

image copyrights

Thank you Skier Dude, will attempt further replacements. Made mess replacing reduced 1.7 File:SGR recruitment leaflet 09 001.jpg. need help with techs on this, task for bot... Wikiwel (talk) 09:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help but now i know how to add copyright tags and have also added a new copyright tagged image file so i request you to delete this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krzy32 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How exactly do I fix the everglades foundation Logo?

The image is ok for use, but how do I document it correctly. this is an area that I have found difficult to document correctly. Thanks

Steve

VMSPROUL (talk) 00:49, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I was reading the original issue that flagged it for deletion, may I drop that warning now that it is referenced? Steve VMSPROUL (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Userfication request

Hi Skier Dude

Could you please userfy the following articles to my name space? I will check them for accuracy and release them to mainspace if they check out.

Regards, ^Bongo_matic 05:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.[reply]

See above for the list - if there's no changes, just let me know & I can restore them, keeping the page histories, rather than you needing to cut & paste them back in ;) Skier Dude (talk) 05:35, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ^Bongo_matic 05:38, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for File:KPCKim.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:KPCKim.jpg. Because you were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. The DRV is located here: Wikipedia:Deletion_review#File:KPCKim.jpg Dreadstar ☥ 03:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Due diligence and image files

You nominated File:5link3Dtop1.gif and File:5link3Drear1.gif for deletion under WP:PUI two months ago, and they were deleted without challenge (or apparent notice among those of us paying attention to vehicular articles...).

Once I noticed that, I did a 2 minute Google search and found the following:

Professor Petru-Aurelian Simionescu
Simiprof's contributions
Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 October 3#File:5link3Dtop1.gif - both nominations accept the listed creator as (c) Simonescu 2006, which the files verify

A trivial comparison indicates that the contributions of User:Simiprof and Prof Simionescu line up perfectly - Automobile technologies, and Romania. "Professor Simionescu" -> "Simiprof" is obvious.

Maybe perhaps a goof there? ...

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 05:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it appears that there was a removal of the {{pd-self}} template by User:KrakatoaKatie - which left the image w/out a license template when I got around to it. I'll restore them & leave a message for KrakatoaKatie as to why s/he removed the tags - nothing too evident that I can tell. Skier Dude (talk) 05:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

request for undeletion of images

1.4 File:A Pocket History of the Soul (chapbook cover).jpg
1.7 File:SGR recruitment leaflet 09 001.jpg
1.8 File:Furst fruts uvl 977.jpg
1.9 File:Axe Hero cd insert cover.jpg
1.10 File:Dust jacket The Joy of Letting Women Down.jpg
1.11 File:WF workshop & book launch flyer 2002.jpg
1.12 File:Beowulf Cartoon bookwork.jpg
1.13 File:Space Opera book 2000.jpg
1.14 File:Ssf6+Processural.jpg
1.15 File:Positive future.jpg
1.16 File:Vis assc cat. cover.jpg

not regular wikipedia user - found listed self-made images used in articles over some years recently deleted with others disputed. slightly concerned as understood I complied with file upload rules in good faith.

1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 1.16 entirely own work as source original and in file reproduction.

1.4, 1.7, 1.8, 1.11 from source material of either non-living associates, living associates and associations. all self made in file reproduction with source permission.

other self-made images not listed appear to have been deleted, although perhaps not by your admin.

request kind assistance in undeletion

Wikiwel (talk) 11:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Greenbahama109

User:Greenbahama109 has uploaded an image as self created that is a duplicate (still with a watermark) of one that has been tagged as lacking permission File:Bahamas-the--marsh-harbour--57301.jpg. I have deleted the second upload as a duplicate and left a message on his/her talk page. I did notice that you have already given them a warning that they may be blocked for evading copyright. Not sure if you were watching so I just thought you would like to know, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 12:21, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FOP follow up

Do you agree with this edit by Graeme Bartlett and his removal of deletion notices from the related images? ww2censor (talk) 16:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Episcopal Church Logo.gif

If you delete File:Episcopal Church Logo.gif please move the talk page to a sub-page of Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review and link it to Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review#File:TEC_arms.PNG OR copy its content and edit history directly into the discussion at Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review#File:TEC_arms.PNG. It is important that this information be preserved as it affect similar images which were created by Wikipedia editors by hand. This particular image was lifted from a web site and is most likely subject to copyright even though the design itself probably is not. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 05:55, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved your note to the talk page, as it won't be me that would do the deletion as the nominator. Skier Dude (talk) 06:00, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Orphaned non-free image File:Merry Christmas Baby.jpg

I am in the process of creating the article for the file, so it will not be orphaned for much longer! Adabow (talk) 08:34, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:File:BambooBlade vol6 Cover.jpg

Hi,

You can speedy File:BambooBlade vol6 Cover.jpg. Thanks. --KrebMarkt 11:14, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image upload File:MalColLogo.jpg

Hello, Skier Dude. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RDJ

SURPRISE!

Hajatvrc has targeted you for a
Random Dose of Joy!

File:Bloodrayne.jpg

Hi, your nomination for deletion was unfortunately based on a quickly reverted vandalism on the article page. Regards Hekerui (talk) 00:45, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:22 - Rouman ~MY DEAR BOY~.jpg

Hi, you have put File:22 - Rouman ~MY DEAR BOY~.jpg up for deletion as an orphaned fair-use image but it's actually in use at Roman (My Dear Boy). For some reason the file page says it isn't in use. What's up with that? ☆Charles Nguyễn 01:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

probably the bleedin' tildes in the file name. I've re-uploaded w/out them & it seems to transclude fine. Skier Dude (talk) 02:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

talkback

Hello, Skier Dude. You have new messages at Tomballguy's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--It's my Junior year in High School! (talk) 03:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)Chris[reply]

Restore please

Talk:William Lewis Shurtleff was deleted by you, can you please restore it. No discussion was made, and it removed the AFD history. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:05, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the future don't blank the page - that makes it AG7 deletable. Skier Dude (talk) 04:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a change to WP:G7 so it is clearer. If this needs discussing, see WT:Speedy deletion#G7 clarified davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 04:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Both of the images of mine that you marked for deletion had a clear statement that they were in the public domain and had links demonstrating that. I have responded in more detail on my talk page. I notice you are going through the images at a great speed. That is commendable, but perhaps you should slow down a bit and read each page. Chillum ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:30, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brian Kelly.jpg

Skier Dude, I think it's okay to delete the referenced file immediately. I am not sure where I got the photo from. If it has copyright protection, I am not sure how to identify the owners and whether permission for reuse will be granted. Jlhcpa (talk) 05:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abdulhamid Torpido.jpg

I added the link. They simply want ackowledgement. I am also trying to get specific permission but may take time. It is a photo sharing site. Note that this photo is 120 years old! Please help me pick a proper tag. Thanks.--Murat (talk) 05:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images to Delete

Please delete File:SellersMontage.JPG and File:2001Montage.JPG immediately. They have been replaced in the article Stanley Kubrick by superior replacements. As for File:M Briefing.JPG and File:BondPersona.JPG I would like some lead time to negotiated their reinstatement in the article from which they were deleted. Thanks--WickerGuy (talk) 09:09, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monkey Grip and Eye of the Storm superseded book cover images

Hi, Ski-D,
Please delete File:Penguin1982Ed HelenGarner MonkeyGrip Cover.PNG and File:Penguin Paperback 1975 PatrickWhite TheEyeoftheStorm.jpg. I'm very pleased to see that they have been replaced with first edition covers.
--Shirt58 (talk) 10:30, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:alice-hargreaves.jpg

Hi and thanks for your message. The image comes from [6] on Commons. It states this quite clearly on the image's page. Thanks. Jack1956 (talk) 11:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

copyright investigations/Arab League

Hi, i'm not sure who to contact exactly about the copyright investigation, the thing is that most of the images if not all have been uploaded by me in my early days of contributing on Wikipedia, and sadly still not aware of the complex, copyright system of wikipedia, tho i HAVE removed alot of them from links i have done, i have yet don't know how to change a copyright, and how to remove an image... and you can make sure by checking my contributions, and you'll find that never in my history of contribution have i edited a copyright status further on, the Arab Atlas watermark is actually made by me, since i'm doing an Atlas on the Arab World, i have uploaded several of these maps to be used on Wikipedia, i CAN, re-upload them without the watermark... moreover i would be glad if i can help with the investigation...

thank you for your efforts...

Arab League User (talk) 13:36, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I notice

Hello, Skier Dude. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Sugarlover101 / User:LoadMeUp101. Thank you. --Powers ^T 14:00, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image Deletion

Hi Skier Dude, Thanks for verifying my images. I am learning to use wikipedia and didn´t know how to link images. I thought I had to upload the images myself. I have already made the necessary changes to the templates (GoldMedal, SilverMedal and BronzeMedal) and don´t need these images. I was trying to delete them, but don´t know how to do it. Please, go ahead and delete as planned the files:

File:Bronze medal.png
File:Silver medal.png
File:Gold medal.png

I have a question. Will my user profile keep this copyright infrigment notice? It wasn´t my intention, although I see I have indeed done it. Thanks in advanced.

Coquidragon 15:33, 13 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coquidragon (talk • contribs)

Closure!

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		For your work on this CCI investigation Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just wrapped it. Hooray. :) I wanted to thank you for your work there. Let's hope when this block expires, he doesn't just return to it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the heads-up

Thanks for the heads-up for the orphan status of the images that had been dropped from Howard the Duck. I have restored the plot section and reinserted the images.

I have another image that is an orphan, which might be used later for the exploded map of Sarasota. The creator of the current one at the article is making an updated one (among a series) and I have noted inaccuracies that exist in the old. Perhaps his new image will be corrected adequately, if not, this orphan might be useful. Since there is no copyright issue, do you think it can remain until he completes his new images? Will check back here for your opinion. ----83d40m (talk) 16:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note about getting them restored even after being deleted. I did restore them to the article and another editor dumped them again... along with the restoration of the section that had contained them. Might not be worth trying to straighten it out... really dislike the hassle over these things and would have to have strong feelings about keeping it to go through the exercise to keep them. ----83d40m (talk) 01:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Orphaned non-free image File:Straight Through My Heart clip.png

To be honest, I forgot I even uploaded that image haha. Thanks for the heads up, the article looks fine without the image so it can go ahead and be deleted. Cougars2012 (talk) 19:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Had you spotted this one

Looks like no licence or non-free use justification to me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lukas_on_the_bed.jpg 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 21:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Strathearn community campus photographs"

Sorry about that :) Fixed now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idaeus (talk • contribs) 18:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Logo-expresscard.jpg

Thanks for the deletion/orphan notification. I investigated, and there's an SVG version of the logo already up, so this one is entirely surplus to requirements. Centrepull (talk) 23:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the help.

greetings,

i'm learning wikipedia and appreciate all that people do in this space. my goal is to become efficient and be able to contribute accordingly. i will be posting many articles for professors and their work.

I am not quite sure how to get help to communicate with administrators but here is a start.

best, touraj —Preceding unsigned comment added by Olibroman (talk • contribs) 06:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures from 'Sugarcane Grassy Shoot Disease'

Will you please tell me how to add licence to uploaded pictures.? I don't see my uploaded pictures anymore.
Do i need to upload all the pictures again with desired copyright licence.?
Please reply ASAP, the article is without pictures since a week. Moderators are late in thir replies. SO PLEASE.

Amityadav8 (talk) 14:17, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rock the Bells (film) - why deleted page? from director of film

Hi Skier Dude -

Can you let me know why the page for Rock the Bells (film) was deleted? The info follows -

21:50, 5 February 2008 Skier Dude (talk | contribs) deleted "Rock The Bells (film)" ‎ (CSD R1: Redirect to non-existent page)
05:26, 3 September 2007 Skier Dude (talk | contribs) moved Rock The Bells (film) to Rock the Bells (film) ‎ (correct caps per Wikipedia:Naming conventions)

The film's website is still up at www.rockthebellsmovie.com so I'm not sure what non-existent page was there.

I'm new to this, so I'm not sure how you reply to me. My email is denishenry@gmail.com Thanks! Openroadfilms (talk) 22:28, 11 December 2009 (UTC)Denis Hennelly - Director - Rock The Bells[reply]

The incorrectly titled Rock The Bells (film) was moved to Rock the Bells (film) - the article was deleted in the interim, and just re-created by you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi,

Could you please evaluate the fair use rationale given for File:SharmilaTagore in Amar Prem, 1972.jpg? I am not very convinced. If you are replying, please do it on my talk page. Thanks -- Raziman T V (talk) 11:20, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I have added a free pic from commons. Does that change things? -- Raziman T V (talk) 13:19, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent uploads by me

Is there a template for "image from a website"? I couldn't find one. ²³¹₉₁Pa (chat me!) 01:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing for Reach org logo

Hi

have changed the licensing copyright tags, so it should be okay now.

thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasha Healy (talk • contribs) 07:58, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reach logos

Okay will change the tags again and will move the article this morning. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasha Healy (talk • contribs) 08:08, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:BernardLeadon1.jpg

The image is no longer orphaned, and I boldly reinserted it into the article. Hopefully with proper fair-use rationale, it will remain. Thank you :> Doc9871 (talk) 08:10, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question on tags placed on images

Hi Skierdude,

You placed the following tags on my talk page regarding several images that seem to be orphaned and are to be deleted, I guess;

Orphaned non-free image File:Odjava.jpg
Orphaned non-free image File:Show Introduction.jpg
Orphaned non-free image File:SegmentCredits.jpg

These images are included in article that had been deleted at an AfD and was placed into my user space (userfied by admin) to keep working on. The article in question is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Turqoise127/Kresimir_Chris_Kunej I was under the impression that such userfications allowed for images to remain in article. Another editor did the same thing yesterday and when I asked him about it told me to go ahead and remove the tags that it was a mistake. Please advise if I need to do something or if this is ok.

Thank you, by the way, for your recent help in advising me in licensing tags for some images.Turqoise127 (talk) 15:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

request for undeletion of images

Any image I upload (including Schomburg, St.John, Brunner, etc.) is good copyright wise. I am the publisher at Vanguard Productions (www.vanguardproductions.net). most will be © Vanguard Productions. I am a newbee at editing Wiki though and appreciate all consideration.

Jdspurlock (talk) 19:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Olivia Benson SVU.png

About this image: File:Oliva Benson - SVU. I'm not the one that originally uploaded it, but I tried to update it with a recent picture and it wouldn't ever update, so I uploaded the image here and used it in the article. Just FYI. --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 21:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you have missed one.

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Aradic-es/Future aticles/UK during destruction of Yugoslavia. There are two pages listed there because there is a mirror article. Please can you also delete it? Miami33139 (talk) 04:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confused about talk page deletion

You deleted Template talk:Prog-lang-stub, but the template/stub still exists... Pcap ping 08:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

copyright info

File:Pirates of the Carabian PA190094.jpg - what info is missing? Deror (talk) 09:01, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Skier Dude. You have new messages at Turqoise127's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deletion in my userspace

Why exactly did you have a problem with this? SpinningSpark 19:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Spinningspark/Work in progress/Flitch of bacon was a redirect to a non-existent page Flitch (bacon) Skier Dude (talk) 05:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, I know, the intention was to move it into mainspace along with User:Spinningspark/Work in progress/Flitch (bacon). My question was not why did you delete it, but why was it causing a problem. I can understand that redirects in mainspace that don't go anywhere are a problem. But in a user's sandbox? I am clearly working on something constructive there, why disrupt it. SpinningSpark 15:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because so many good "intentions" end up with redlinks in all "spaces". There's a cleanup list that these all appear in Wikipedia:Database reports/Broken redirects, and as redlinks don't serve any purpose, they're routinely deleted from all spaces. It would be best to just create the page in userspace, put a "working" template on it, and it won't get sorted into the cleanup lists. Skier Dude (talk) 05:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No it wouldn't, it would get it on even more maintenance lists and endlessly templated, even speedy deleted. The whole idea of working in user space is that the project can be worked on in peace. Articles can be left in an unacceptable condition for long periods of time, or even just as rough notes, without fear of them being "maintained". In this particular case, even though the article is pretty advanced, we don't want to put it into mainspace now because it is being saved for a 1st March DYK special. It is not the business of administrators to dictate the working methods of editors, our task is to protect the encyclopedia, not interfere with the editorial process in any way. SpinningSpark 10:44, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and putting "intentions" in quotation marks shows a that you are not assuming good faith in my intentions. I suggest you go and re-read WP:AGF to remind yourself of what that is all about. SpinningSpark 10:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

Hi, I was wondering why this picutre you uploaded was deleted: [[7], seems like a good idea to show Kim's non-superhero side! Yabadabadoozie (talk) 20:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found it here: [8]! Yabadabadoozie (talk) 20:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Azimage logo

Hi,

the image File:Azimage logo.png is referenced from User:Rotarucalin/AZImage, so please do not delete the image yet. Unfortunately the article was marked for speedy deletion, so I am trying to improve it under my personal page. Why this is not showing to you under file links I am not sure. I can find the page under file links, so why is this image an orphan? rac 20:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I have moved the article back to wiki space, so the file is no orphan anymore. Could you please remove the deletion? Thank you. rac 13:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Virusunknown

Would you be willing to take a look at the seven media contributions of User talk:Virusunknown. You tagged serveral of them for various levels of deletion of scrutiny, and I tagged a few more after you were done (for lack of Fair use rational). The unloader has changed all of the licenses to public domain stating that he/she is the copyright holder. Despite this on this user's talk page he has stated he is neither an employee or student of the university, so I wonder how he can hold the copyright for 40 year old pictures. Anyways you seem to know much more about media tagging than I do, so if you have the time your attention would be appreciated. Thanks! Grey Wanderer (talk) 21:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PSSAYMCD.gif

What's up with deleting the image? Look, it's too small to make a bootleg version of, and it would be dead obvious if anybody tried because the original is a silkscreened piece of felt with a Soviet military pin through the centre of it! Since this falls under fair use, please cut this nonsense out and put it back. Thank you. Eyevocal (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please Restore, ready to go live from sandbox after review :)

Hello, Skier Dude. You have new messages at Lavath's talk page.
Message added 00:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Skier Dude. You have new messages at Gongshow's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re:File:Ikigami vol01 Cover.jpg

I already requested that file to be deleted to another administrator prior your notice.

See: User_talk:Dinoguy1000#Request_image_deletion rational is in the discussion. The time stamp is anterior to the message you left in my talk page.

Cordially.

--KrebMarkt 07:37, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting this for me, Skier Dude! =) --Dinoguy1000 (talk · contribs) as 67.58.229.153 (talk) 21:43, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:SVU - MeloniIce-TMiller.jpg

Delete it then DUDE, I dont care, users at Wiki a screwing with the L&O and CSI franchises enough anyway. It's stupid. Do what you want! --Mgfan222 (talk) 02:55, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How can I set up my user page???

Can you please help me so I can set up my user page please? Thanks, Carthage44

sig

Hey! I know I have worked on your signature in the past and you decided not to use it because of the length. I am back here to ask you something. Do you want me to make you a noticable, cool, but all at the same time new signature? Btilm 03:25, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks, I'm settled with the green/brown, which is my visual cue. Thanks for the offer!Skier Dude (talk) 03:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've

got your

message,

Skier Dude!

I know, I made the image myself like all the other ones that say Looney Kid on it with Microsoft Paint and another special program called Photo Editing Software which is super cool!--Looney Kid (talk) 13:25, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About the Category About the 2010 American Television series Endings

I just saw the category about the 2010 television series endings a few minutes ago and I wondered how the category has gotten repopulated but I think that the category should have one or more American television series endings in it. Ericthebrainiac (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I am saying is for you to recreate the category with two or more American television series endings for me, please. Ericthebrainiac (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Banned user

Please remove your deleted orphan notifications from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wikinger , because he is BANNED INFINITELY and needs no notifications at all. His talk should be used only for socking history. 79.191.101.131 (talk) 18:41, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Photograph

Hello - You have tagged AG Lafley.jpg as not having enough information and candidate for deletion. I am the photographer and the poster, so I may need just a bit of help as to what I'm supposed to do. I'll try by adding a description, but the Copyright details are a bit confusing for me. Any help appreciated. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnblair (talk • contribs) 20:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:File Warning Templates

Hi Skier Dude. Thanks for the suggestions! I have implemented the changes. I'll probably be adding them to WP:WARN in about a week or so, but in the mean time, if you have any other changes, please feel free to edit the drafts directly. Best, FASTILY ^(TALK) 23:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisky ...

Hello. Don't know if you remember but you nominated some Wikisky images at PUF. I deleted them. I just wondered if you'd noticed just how many more there are on enWP: another 100 or so. Bummer. Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That seems like a good way to handle things. Thanks! Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:37, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1961 Corvette

The first version is red (61 Corvette) the second one (was) B&W (1961 Corvette) I downloaded the second one because I tried to download a new version of 61 Corvette with a different photo.. (update didn't take right-shows a distorted version of the first photo) You should have deleted that one-61 Corvette (orphan), not the new upload 1961 Corvette in the article. Please don't delete the one in the article this time. Thanks (Vegavairbob (talk) 06:48, 21 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

OK, looks like a cache error. By the way - File:1961 Corvette.jpg is still showing up as not in any articles. The top image for File:61 Corvette.jpg is identical to 1961 corvette - but both of the images in the detail boxes (bottom) show up as the coloured versions!? Even weirder - click on the thumbnail of the 2nd upload for 1961 corvette - comes up as the black and white version! I'm going to wait a bit on both of them to see if it's just a problem of the servers catching up. And, to make things a bit easier, could you format the image names as links -- [[:File.extention]] (colon before File and double [[]]) -- makes it easier to figure out what you're referring to. Skier Dude (talk) 07:03, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Neither of these images is showing up as being used in any articles. Skier Dude (talk) 07:09, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. The edits I was working on including the second File:1961 Corvette.jpg were not saved. Was working for hours on C1 Corvette I saved the last edits and the correct second download (b&w) 1961 Corvette image is now showing. File:61 Corvette.jpg reverted to original color image. Now they are different images. No need to delete it. Is there any way to reduce the size of File:61 Corvette.jpg to match the size of the other photos in the article? (Could you do that?) That's why I included File:1961 Corvette.jpg in the article, but would prefer the color image if it matched the size of the others. Thanks(Vegavairbob (talk) 08:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Template:Newpage/doc

Thanks for the FYI there at my talk page about protecting Template:Newpage/doc. I've no problem with this, I simply created outline documentation because none existed before (one of my pet hates about many templates, people are just magically expected to know when, where and how to use them). Of course I'd prefer it not to be protected, but I was not really expecting to maintain it much. I've never used this template myself, and would probably regard it as redundant, since the creation of a page by definition means it as a new page, and I imagine it is to be expected that content will be added shortly after its creation (define "shortly after" :) ).

But it would be nice sometimes to have a "basically new page" template of some kind where one can mark a page as being essentially a total rewrite or expansion. Of course there is {{inuse}}, but one which can be permanently placed e.g. on the talk page that says "this article was basically entirely rewritten between versions x and y", giving kinda a "stable" checkpoint in the article's history. This might aid future editors who see a stream of small sub-editing kind of edits after a big rewrite. I'm thinking, for example, at the recent rewrite of botanical garden, which after consensus that a rewrite was desirable, this was mostly accomplised in user space, but was still subbed significantly in the article space after the rewrite was moved over.

Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 09:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays

Happy Holidays to you and yours Skier Dude. Turqoise127 (talk) 18:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Orphaned non-free image File:Killer Lynn Turner.jpg

Hello, Skier Dude. I'm confused by your recent note on my talk page regarding this file because it is not an orphan; it is used in Lynn Turner (murderer). Is there something I'm missing? Thanks, momo ricks 05:21, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. Happy new year, momo ricks 06:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please Lend Help, not certain how to follow your suggestions!

re: My new unreviewed article

Hello, Skier Dude. You have new messages at Lavath's talk page.
Message added Uproot your questions from their ground and the dangling roots will be seen. More questions! (talk) 19:42, 23 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

File:NGC 2359.jpg

Hello. I'm here because images from Wikisky.org are still going deleted here... I left a message on wikiproject astronomy, saying that we have an OTRS ticket for those images, and this ticket is this: 2009052010051757 Please help me to inform en.wiki. Bye. --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 19:56, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:TheSinglesCollectionCover.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:TheSinglesCollectionCover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Chase wc ⁹¹ 23:41, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can you help me out?

There is a user named "Tonyvillagomez21" and he keeps on editing rapper Lil' Flip's page over and over again putting things that aren't true on the page and deleting my changes every time. He puts information that doesn't have any sources, when my information has sources. If there is anyway that you could stop him in some way, I would be appreciative.

Thank you very much,

NewOrleans4Life

Stone Canyon Band.jpg

I downloaded this image in the wrong format (TIFF), and couldn't delete it, so I blanked and orphaned it as my only option. I would have removed it myself if I could have, and I won't be able to alter it or contest its deletion, so please delete it whenever you want to. Thank you... Doc9871 (talk) 13:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

a