User talk:Infrogmation/Archive November December 07Archive of old talk for User:Infrogmation
I had my google web history turned off when I found it):... I've tried to found the site again, but no luck... I'm going to put in articles between the Franco-Prussian war and WWI, perhaps someone that sees it will know about it & source it; any suggestions about appropriate articles?--victor falk 15:04, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Air AlgérieHey - I've been reverting the changes on Air Algérie and Royal Air Maroc that assert Royal Air Maroc is smaller than Air Algerie. (I have no personal interest in the matter, I started watching RAM and noticed this trend) I saw your comment ("Repeatedly reverted assertions with no references despite request distracting from lead of the article; moving it a bit for down for now.") and I wanted to show that I'm trying to not edit war, but instead I'm trying to solve the issue. ([1] [2] [3]) I believe there are actually good sources that RAM is larger than Air Algérie (Talk:Royal Air Maroc#Royal air maroc is larger than Air algerie). I wondered if you had any suggestions about how to deal with an anonymous editor who won't discuss (it looks like the 3 IPs I warned are all the same editor). Thanks --Matt 23:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC) QuestionsHello Infrogmation: I found my way here by looking for messages about fair use of images. I haven't tried to bring any images to Wikipedia, but in editing text I have seen enough to realize it is tricky. I would much appreciate if you would answer a couple or three basic questions, OR point me to the right place to find the answers. I understand about copyright, in general terms. I don't understand the process of verification related to images. 1) If I take a photograph that may be useful in a Wikipedia article, HOW DO I TELL/CONVINCE/PROVE TO WIKIPEDIA that (a) I actually took the photo and (b) that I'm making it freely available? (I know that I am honest, but Wikipedia doesn't know that.) 2) Same question except suppose the photo was taken by my brother-in-law? (he is actually a photographer.) 3) Suppose the photo is from a website outside Wikipedia (say www.xyz.com) and they send me a e-mail message saying their photographer took the photo, and it is fine to use the photo in Wikipedia. I sent a request to www.xyz.com, and they replied, and I have their e-mail, but how can I prove to Wikipedia that it is a bona fide e-mail and not something I edited? Any help you can give on this would be appreciated. Thank you, Wanderer57 01:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Your block of User:216.213.209.185I'm puzzled by your reasons for this block - I found one test edit/piece of vandalism by this user, which I reverted, along with a couple of others I found when checking the user's contributions. I gave the user a {{uw-test2}} warning, as there had only been one previous warning (yours). As I understand it, a user should receive the full set of warnings before being blocked. I'd appreciate any insight you have on this. Many thanks. – Tivedshambo (talk) 06:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Image:030411ac millgreen4sm.jpgHi, I believe on 3rd November 2007 you deleted this and other pictures I had submitted to Wikipedia. (See [4] )Please would you explain the reason why. I believe that there was a link to my page but I note that you did not put anything on my talk page before deleting the images. They are photographs which I took and freely donated to Wikipedia. If it simply a matter of putting the correct rights notice with the pictures, please let me know so that I can do this. Regards, Alf Boggis 16:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Finale Wiki GeekI am geting mad. I had all my stuff on a subpage. you get all mad at me for getting edit protetion. I might just quit using Wikipedia because you delete subpage and all this junk. Mad at you Finale Wiki Geek (talk) 20:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I know I thought this might help to keep new members out of the way for the new infobox we can put up. Sorry if I got all mad. We need to get a new infobox for the page. Clover Records Finale Wiki Geek (talk) 20:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Original Barnstar
Katrina Mobile Alabama flooded photo27-Nov-2007: Correct: Image:Hurricane Katrina Mobile Alabama flooded parking lot 20050829.jpg. Your transfer of the image was correct. Thank you for your efforts. Sorry, I did not respond sooner: electricity failed last night at 10:25pm, and I have another computer virus (this time, Explorer.EXE has been modified with spyware to contact a group in Russia, who might be spying for US Govt, who knows these days of "Patriot" Act 2). I have no other files from Hurricane Katrina: an earlier computer virus in 2006 killed my other PC totally. Thank you for collecting Mobile images from Hurricane Katrina. I just now expanded the description for the Mobile Federal Courthouse steps: Wikimedia Image:KatrinaMobileCourthouseSteps.jpg. I will try to find & upload other PD-USGov images for Mobile. -Wikid77 (talk) 17:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Katrina Mobile Alabama flood times27-Nov-2007: FYI: The waters started rising in Mobile around 9am on August 29, 2005 for about 5 hours. By August 30, the flood waters had receded from the streets, but interiors were still flooded/wet: Mobile street flooding was on 29th only. Because the Hurricane Katrina winds were still blowing during the flood, photos are limited. On Mobile Bay, when the waves/water reached 20 feet or so, the I-10 elevated Jubilee Parkway (Mobile to Spanish Fort) was closed to traffic (on August 29, time yet unknown) due to waves crashing over the bridge. Battleship USS Alabama (BB-60) tilted on its base (listed) due to the storm surge, and it took months to re-align (I would consider ship photos as being Mobile). The previous day (August 28), very strong winds had begun in southern Alabama as Katrina headed west to Louisiana. I remember the wind gusts lasting over 30 hours. When the next storm, Hurricane Rita passed Alabama, strong winds dislodged hanging debris from Katrina (some which still remains 2 years later); however, I was in Houston when Rita hit Lake Charles and Orange/Beaumont, Texas but have no photos: people died evacuating from Houston due to multi-day traffic jams. -Wikid77 (talk) 17:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Uploaded Flickr photo of Katrina Mobile GM&O28-Nov-2007: I have uploaded that Flickr photo of the parking lot near the GM&O building as Wikimedia Image:Katrina Mobile GMO parking lot.jpg, CC-BY-2.0 (reviewed 6min. later). The author name retrieved by Flinfo is "Mel Silvers" (link http://www.flickr.com/people/45467976@N00) who is "au_tiger01 / Mel Silvers" on Flickr (I don't know him, but likely "Auburn Univ. Tigers"); however, the Metadata (only on the full-size image) shows Author (photographer) as "Michelle Rollsq" (or Michelle Rolls no "q"), photography coordinator of the newspaper Mobile Register (search Google: "Michelle Rolls"+Mobile). Those Flickr images are very low-quality photographs, as if they have been edited by a tool which introduces severe JPEG blurring (not rain/fog): they don't seem to be the original work by Michelle Rolls, and it seems unlikely they were purposely blurred for release unless required by some photo-usage policy? Some clearer photos exist, but they have copyright protection. Hence, I'm looking now for USGovt photos. I'm not sure what else you want to know...? -Wikid77 (talk) 11:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC) About deleting images28-Nov-2007: I think when deleting images, you have to consider each image, separately, on a case-by-case basis. If someone found a stolen item in a person's house, that wouldn't be sufficient cause to confiscate all items in the house as being also stolen property. All this takes time, and I would consider delays as justifiable "due process" (reasonable delay to those concerned) to determine which images to delete. Katrina is not exactly a top-dollar photo subject any longer. Unauthorized uploads of new movie photos or TV screenshots would seem a much, much higher priority. Meanwhile, perhaps original photographers should be contacted to find out why the Flickr Katrina images are such low-resolution data and was that authorized or acceptable to the original photographers. Along that line, perhaps those photographers might release other photos for use in Wikipedia, so everyone might benefit more from that approach. Just alerting or warning those photographers might result in some photos released as a kind of reward. However, note that from a photographer's perspective, being noticed in Wikipedia is a type of advertising for them as well, as long as their photos are not endangered, which seems unlikely with such low-quality images. (this note is repeated under User_talk:Wikid77). -Wikid77 (talk) 20:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Delete Mobile Press-Register images29-Nov-2007: Your hunch about the Press-Register images is correct, and all should be deleted from Wikimedia and Flickr: according to today's written memo (email) from Michelle Rolls, Photography Coordinator at the Mobile Press-Register, all those Katrina photos were made on company time, with copyrights retained by the Press-Register, and released to Associated Press with restrictions on use. Those photos were copied to Flickr or elsewhere without proper license/permission. There is no authorization, yet, to release Katrina images to Wikipedia. Text from memo is below:
The only Katrina-Mobile image exempt is the US-Govt photo of the flooded courthouse steps, so I will use that image instead of parking-lot images. (this is a follow-up to "About deleting images" above, and posted also to User_talk:Wikid77). -Wikid77 (talk) 21:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Clive WilsonWhen I removed the red link from that article, I did not consider if the subject's notability. Red links give the reader an unfavorable impression of the site and in my view red link disambiguation at the top of a page is not necessary. - Gilliam 05:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Move pageI tried to do what you say, but in this occasion the 2 pages were created... so what to do? I changed the text from one to another... may be I would have to do the same with the history... --CarlesVA (talk) 17:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, sorry,I hope you have patience with old questions. I cannot log in, using my known (?) password, and did not get mail giving me a new password. Perhaps I goofed by not providing a mail address? Can you look in on this, point me in the right direction? I registered about 8 months ago. Thanks for your time, Infrogmation Regards, Bruce BruceWayne —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.248.253.6 (talk) 23:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC) Regarding a user you blocked indefinitelyGreetings. You blocked User:The_Mystery_Man indefinitely on November 11. I've noticed another user named User:The_Special_Education_Squad who follows VERY similar editing practices as Mystery Man did. For example:
I've opened up a checkuser request. Any other thoughts? --Tom (talk - email) 16:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC) Image:Hegel.jpghello, I am an user of http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Fal7i could you please let me know what is the book you talks: Engraving scanned from a 19th century book thanks in advance and sory for my bad english --83.156.93.120 (talk) 20:42, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Bob Latta.jpgI'm a bit baffled as to why you deleted this image...It's a government image from his official portrait like any other Congressman would have. Can you un-delete it or explain what I'm missing?--CastAStone//(talk) 17:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
no Morning Call ???Hope you understood my edit on cafe du monde, think my edit summary was oddly worded. the citation request was on political cause of move, not the Morning Call's having been in the French Mkt. Is there no article on Morning Call? I am surprised! Jacksinterweb (talk) 22:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of MichaelangeloA tag has been placed on Michaelangelo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding
Shelly Manne, Four Years LaterJust wanted to thank you for having left me an encouraging and appreciative message when I started the Shelly Manne article nearly four years ago. Your (and Danny's) encouragement helped spur me on to add to and refine the article over the years. It has now achieved "Good Article" status, and I don't know if I would have gone this far without that early encouragement. Regards, Alan W (talk) 05:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Detroit ElectricThank you for that invite! I'm certainly going to upload that photo and allow Creative Commons for it. --Reynardo (talk) 12:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC) AEStevenson picI note in User_talk:Infrogmation/Archive1 your lk ref'g to AES which for a time designated the 19th cent VP but now is a Dab reflecting the ambiguity between him and the 20th cent pres-cand & UN amb (and 2 less likely possibilities), just in case you are concerned abt this. Fair use rationale for Image:HitOfTheWeekLabel.pngThanks for uploading or contributing to Image:HitOfTheWeekLabel.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Save_Us_229 23:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Footer
|