User talk:Walter.Arrighetti

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent edits, such as the ones to the page REDCODE , do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the "sandbox" rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:25, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Helpme

{{helpme}} I'd like to know what's wrong with my latest edit on REDCODE. I've been a Wikipedia contributor for years and something like that has never happened to me before. I read the warning added to the page and improved significantly the informative content regarding the file format. The subject of the article is not does not pose a conflict of interest to me, because I work with RED files every day, not for them. Can I please have more clearance on this?

If you are referring to this diff, (which was reverted) it seems you removed a lot of content, without an edit summary as to why. (This is usually seen as a type of vandalism, so your edits may have been misconstrued by the other editor.) ^Avicenna_sis @ 20:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the edits look OK, but yes - I expect they are referring to this particular edit. I suspect that you accidentally removed a load of stuff - the references section, the external links, and the template. As you didn't give an edit summary, the user was probably right to revert it and give you a notification message here.

If it was a mistake, then don't worry about it - these things happen. If you want, you could speak to the person who posted the notification, User talk:I dream of horses.

Apologies if you are an experienced Wikipedian - we do try to not template regular users, but in fairness, your account shows only 58 edits, so the user wasn't to know.

In short - don't worry; feel free to remove the template message from this page, because you've dealt with it, and...keep up the good stuff.

Please start completing the Edit summary each time you edit, which helps avoid confusion - it makes the article history easier to understand; for example, compare this to e.g. this one.

For more help, you can either;

Leave a message on my own talk page; OR
Use another {{helpme}}; OR
Talk to us live, with this or this.

The last of those is particularly useful - please try it; pop in now and say hello. Chzz ► 20:18, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was my revision. You removed a bunch of content by mistake. I apologize for reverting your mistake. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 18:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello: you are right I accidentally removed a page back then. Thansk for helping. Hope this is okay now, Walter.Arrighetti (talk) 00:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:RSX file icon.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:RSX file icon.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 01:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 01:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Hello; I think I understood all concerned and solved the prolbems. Could please someone dropping by do a check? Walter.Arrighetti (talk) 19:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will start off by saying I do not have a full grasp on Copyrights. (Assuming that is what are you asking about.) However, as far as I know, Only the copyright holder has the right to authorize derivative works. These include pictures of sculptures, action figures and other copyrighted works. The same principle applies to other works too, you can't make a movie version of a book you just read without the permission of the author either, because it would be a derivative work. Furthermore, I don't think the PD-textlogo license would apply here - looking at other logos that fall under PD-textlogo, like File:Boeing_wordmark.svg and File:ARD_logo.svg, which are very simplistic, whereas the image in question here has much greater detail. Again, just my understanding - it may well be worth waiting for someone with a better copyright background to double-check. :) Keep up the positive contributions! ^Avicenna_sis @ 19:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also think the text logo is a non starter. I would suggest using {{non-free use rationale}} and {{Non-free fair use in}} templates - but you will have to make sure that the logo is a lower resolution than the standard logo that is normally seen. Maybe ask your question at Media copyright questions page - this will be seen by editors with a good knowledge of the policies. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at your discription, you have modified a copyrighted image (if I get what you are saying). As in Non-free Guideline, it says "It is illegal (among other things) to reproduce or make derivative works of copyrighted works without legal justification." This image falls under that. If you wanted to not edit it, and put it under the Non-free use, that could be ok. Let me know if you have more questions. /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 20:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know there is no logo in File:RSX file icon.png, despite being the icon itself an original work by Adobe. Yet, I couldn't find any Copyright statements regarding their icons. At last, before choosing the license type, I compared with other even better-known icons from the same Adobe's product line, such as File:Adobe_Illustrator_logo.png or File:Photoshop_CS4.png and simply copied those licenses since I think they might have been already properly licensed in Wikipedia / Wiki Commons. What are your impressions so far?

File permission problem with File:R3D file icon black.png

Thanks for uploading File:R3D file icon black.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. :Jay8g ^{Hi!- I am... -What I do...} _{WASH- BRIDGE- WPWA - MFIC- WPIM} 04:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC) You are right. The permissions are not right; I will remove it at once. Thanks and sorry for the delay :) Walter.Arrighetti (talk) 00:26, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:RSX file icon.png

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:RSX file icon.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 08:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:RSX file icon.png)

Thanks for uploading File:RSX file icon.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of REDCODE

The article REDCODE has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable target of spammy wikilinks

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Be..anyone (talk) 07:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:R3D file icon black.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:R3D file icon black.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Academy Color Encoding System, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SDI. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:R3D file icon.png

A tag has been placed on File:R3D file icon.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Pkbwcgs (talk) 07:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:RDC folder icon.png

The file File:RDC folder icon.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:RDM folder icon.png

The file File:RDM folder icon.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]