User talk:Fir0002

Welcome back :)) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Casliber, good to hear from you :) It's good to be back! --Fir0002 03:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS: If you take any photos of cool-looking plants, there are a bunch of us who can try and figure out what they are - anything in flower...heh, cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh cool, thanks for the notice I'll definitely bear that in mind! --Fir0002 11:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Red fox with prey sharpened levels.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Red fox with prey sharpened levels.jpg. 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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MorganKevinJ^(talk) 01:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome and a request

Hi Fir0002, Welcome back. If I may be so rude and immediately make a request of you... Would you mind subcategorizing your pictures here by state? It was tempting to assume they were all from Victoria, but now that you're back, it's better that you do the work and get it right! --99of9 (talk) 11:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the slow reply - thanks for the welcome 99 and I'll get onto the categorizing now (it is pretty easy as they are in fact al from Victoria). --Fir0002 10:53, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Email

You have email on your wiki account's address. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Diliff pano bldg 72 monash clayton.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Diliff pano bldg 72 monash clayton.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. :Jay8g ^{Hi!- I am... -What I do...} _{WASH- BRIDGE- WPWA - MFIC- WPIM} 01:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - Used your media file

This is a courtesy note. One of your image files is featured in a new commercial eBook in Apple’s iBooks store: http://itunes.apple.com/us/book/dr.-kemps-kids-love-bugs/id497852225?mt=11

I’ve contributed images to Wikipedia for over seven years now (including several POTD and Featured Images) and I designed the WikiSpecies logo. I respect your work here and the CC-BY-SA license we all labor under.

I know commercializing Wikipedia work is tricky and so I’ve taken great pains to follow your CC-BY-SA license requirements. I also plan to donate 10% of my proceeds to the Wikimedia Foundation directly. This is the very first self-published e-book created with Apple’s new tools and sold in the store.

I’ve given your file a credit line in the “Image and Video Credits” section starting at page 24 as required here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License

This compilation features many of the finest Wikipedia media files in their exact form and not as derivative works. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verbatim_copying_under_the_GFDL#Making_verbatim_copies_of_images

If I did alter your work -- such as cutting out an insect part or adding a video sound track -- I shared a Share Alike version of the new media in a DRM-free format and listed the web address in the credits section.

Thank you very much for uploading your work to Wikipedia and releasing it for the world to use in enriching educational formats.

jk (talk) 07:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jeremy, thanks for sending me this courtesy message. However, you are mistaken in thinking my images are licensed under teh CC-BY-SA. They are not. They are licenced under the GFDL v 1.2 and it is these terms you will need to comply with. One significant requirement of this licence is you must include a copy of the licence with the work. An e-book is tricky as on the one hand it will generally be the case that the user will have access to the internet and hence a URL may be sufficient. On the other hand, e-books will often be used in situations where the user has no internet coverage (outside of a home wi-fi in a train for example). This indicate you'd need to include the text of the licence as an appendix to your book. Having said that, I will be happy to help you with this project and a credit line of "(c) Flagstaffotos" will be sufficient.
On a side point I don't think your interpretation of derivative works is correct - as I understand it, the work in which the derivative is produce as a whole must be licenced under the terms of the original licence (I believe the intent of the CC-BY-SA licence is to virally increase free content) --Fir0002 04:54, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is not correct. If you look at the code of the latest CC-BY-SA it boils down to the difference between an Adaptation (which is what they call derivative work now) and a Collection. It looks to me as if using an Image in a book would qualify as a Collection. This seems to be supported by the intention of the SA license that future users are not able to add new restrictions to a derivative of your work [1]. Jeremykemp is in compliance with this by making the adapted version of your content, the modified pictures, freely available under the SA terms. These adaptations are then part of a collection, which is not subject to the SA clause. I would have thought this use case would be discussed more on the internet, but I found it hard to find any examples or FAQs on this (other than the original license text). --Dschwen 16:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right Dschwen - it's clearest in section 4(a) "This Section 4(a) applies to the Work as incorporated in a Collection, but this does not require the Collection apart from the Work itself to be made subject to the terms of this License." --Fir0002 03:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am very happy to see your comment here because your art appears most numerously in this collection. By your comments above, I think you will feel that I'm compliant with your intended license if I: 1) Add the GFDL in an appendix; 2) Add a credit that includes "(c) Flagstaffotos" And I'm thinking that you now agree with my interpretation of proper handling of derivative work and the CC license? I'm less concerned with the legalese here than in avoiding making you feel that I've taken something from you that I was not entitled to. Are we cool? jk (talk) 05:48, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The derivative file is available CC-BY-SA here: http://simteach.com/kidslovebugs/credits/AntennaParts.key I altered your image to illustrate the “Moniliform” antenna type - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Melaleuca_sawfly.jpg jk (talk) 06:01, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes what you suggest would be great, we are cool :) It's great to see someone genuinely concerned about the interests of wiki photographers in their works! Cheers --Fir0002 11:22, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, obviously, I'm a big fan of your work! jk (talk) 08:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks jk :)

In six months the book has earned $293 and so I made a donation this morning to Wikipedia Foundation for $29.30. The book is now a featured selection in iTunes > Books > Textbooks > Science & Nature. Thanks again! jk (talk) 13:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unlucky nom

This was one of the most unlucky noms I have seen, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Messier 82. If your wish, can you renominate? --Extra 999 (Contact ^me) 14:49, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Focus limiter.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Focus limiter.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. :Jay8g ^{Hi!- I am... -What I do...} _{WASH- BRIDGE- WPWA - MFIC- WPIM} 23:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Northern Carmine Bee-eater (2nd nom)

Hi Brand, this is just to let you know that there is discussion over whether or not the nomination linked above should be promoted. If you support or oppose the alternative image, could you please clarify at the nomination or at the talk page. Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:PortoVenere Pasta edit.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:PortoVenere Pasta edit.jpg. 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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hello Fir0002,

You have messages at w:Featured_picture_candidates#Common_Lime_Mating

Regards, -- Jkadavoor (talk) 08:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Park.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Park.jpg, 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) 14:28, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Letterbox.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Letterbox.jpg, 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) 21:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo usage

Hi, I've been working on a small game built around animal quizzes and I wanted to let you know I've used some of your pictures.

I found your pictures here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Long_nosed_weevil_edit.jpg I attributed this picture as described on that website: Fir0002 with this link: http://www.flagstaffotos.com.au/gallery2/main.php and also added a link to the license: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:GNU_Free_Documentation_License_1.2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ischnura_heterosticta02.jpg I attributed this picture as described on that website: Fir0002 with this link: http://www.flagstaffotos.com.au/gallery2/main.php and also added a link to the license: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:GNU_Free_Documentation_License_1.2

I hope you're happy with it, please let me know if this is not the case. You can find the game here: http://apps.facebook.com/animalalbum Or through here: http://www.facebook.com/pages/AnimalAlbum/156339584490672

Kind regards, Garfunkel Jansen (talk) 08:22, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Thanks for taking the pictures and making them available.

Notice of change

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup invitation: Melbourne 26

Melbourne Meetup

Next: 6 January 2013 at La Trobe City Campus
Previous: 25 November 2012

Hi there! You are cordially invited to a meetup next Sunday (6 January). Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne 26. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 05:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Victoria)

On "free coz it is on the internet"

Saw your notice on Diliff's page. I'm well aware of the phenomenon. I don't believe any good person, who understands licensing law, could reuse a GFDL-licensed image in good faith. The wording clearly applies only to textual documents and so is irrelevant at worst and dubious at best. This leaves the good person at risk of breaking copyright law.

I want to help good people to be honest. And I sleep easy by not caring what the bad people get up to. Too many folk here give themselves ulcers worrying about what the bad people might be doing with their work. Like your post to Diliff. Not good for your soul. -- Colin°^Talk 09:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You know what is really bad for the soul, Colin? Not to mention deeply corrosive of the stomach lining? User-stalking. Now I don't know how you came to be so emotionally involved with this issue, but I would suggest you take a deep breath and lay off refreshing that watchlist of yours for a few days - go divert your energy to something a little more constructive.

Secondly, I would suggest you get off your high horse and think about this issue a little more practically. This whole champion of a righteous cause act you're doing is just so misguided and delusional. By banning GFDL uploads (and lets be clear, this is evidently your goal) all you are achieving is removing wonderful content from the public! In what universe is that a good outcome for the project, or for the public that use it? All you are achieving is a loss of content, a loss of knowledge, a loss of choice. Personally I sleep well at night knowing that I've made a damn fine contribution to Wikipedia through the hundreds of high quality images that I've uploaded. Images which were enjoyed by thousands of people.

Thirdly, you seem to be quite ignorant of licensing law and in no position to postulate on how a good person could use the GFDL in good faith - in fact I would suggest you don't have any legal qualifications whatsoever. The terms of the GFDL comfortably encompass photographs: "This License applies to any manual or other work, in any medium, that contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it can be distributed under the terms of this License. Such a notice grants a world-wide, royalty-free license, unlimited in duration, to use that work under the conditions stated herein. The "Document", below, refers to any such manual or work." (see Clause 1 - definitions). You are not helping good people be honest, all you are doing is hindering the work of valuable contributors. --Fir0002 09:58, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]