User talk:Stormbear

Notability of Town Called Dobson

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Town Called Dobson, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Town Called Dobson is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Town Called Dobson, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 13:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Fawkes Night

Centred is not a misspelling. Like about half of the vocabulary of the English language the word is derived from French and in most of the world where English is spoken the word is normally spelled centre, the same applies to the words metre , fibre theatre etc.. Centered is the American spelling because the root word is spelled center in the US which is a result of the spelling reforms of Noah Webster. The Guy Fawkes article is about a British subject and as per WP:ENGVAR#National_varieties_of_English - should remain using British English spellings and dialect. Jooler 00:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:1-18-07 tcd wikiuseonly.png

File:1-18-07 tcd wikiuseonly.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:1-18-07 tcd wikiuseonly.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:1-18-07 tcd wikiuseonly.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Tcd 150x200.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Tcd 150x200.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 23:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Tcd 150x200.gif

Thank you for uploading File:Tcd 150x200.gif. 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. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:37, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a creative commons image and was created for use as a masthead for the Webcomics Project infobox. I have noted the creative commons permissions in the file page. If more needs to be done or modified, please drop a note here. Stormbear (talk)

Okay, based on your username I gather that you are the author of the strip. That's great – thanks for helping improve Wikipedia (but be sure to keep a neutral point of view and avoid conflicts of interest when editing, especially when working on articles related to yourself). Regarding the topic at hand, we actually need proof that you are the author of the work and that you are indeed licensing the image under the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license. Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials has details on this. In short, the easiest way to show that the image is indeed licensed as you state is to put a note on your website of the fact (the current licensing page doesn't release it under such a license). If you don't want to do that, Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials has details on alternative methods.

I know that this is probably a real pain, but it is Wikipedia policy. Enough people upload things without proper permission, which can make copyright holders angry (and for good reason), that we have to make it hard, even for the people who are probably doing things ~~right~~ left ☺. Anyways, I'm watching this page so if you respond here I'll see it (but thanks for the e-mail before!)

(P.S., congrats on getting to meet Michael Moore!)

–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:48, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. You guys are not the only website needing clarification. Some of my paying clients have come back to me in recent months requesting (actually it was their lawyer) permission to use graphics that they paid for and have an invoice stating such. Anyway, check the link again - I added a blurb about these two images specifically (and fixed a theme issue).

http://www.towncalleddobson.com/?page_id=348

Let me know if I can be of further help. I am not that great with Wiki coding. The page in question was built by an intern of mine long ago and I am a bit hesitant to mod it as I do not know all the ins and outs of wiki page formatting policies. But I do try to keep up!

Stormbear (talk)

That's perfect! Thank you so much. I'll update the image descriptions for you to properly reflect the licensing. Barring some strange unforeseen circumstances, there shouldn't be any further need to be worried about deletion as long as that licensing info remains on your site.

Thanks! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 23:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished updating both files! Now, if only all copyright holders were as willing as you are to make their works available for free use....

Regardless, thank you! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 23:30, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If all Wikipedians were as helpful as you.... don't get me started. Thanks for all your help Stormbear (talk)