User talk:Sherool

Here about a deleted image?

Note: Undeletion of images was implemented on June 16 2006, images deleted on or after that date can be easily restored (images deleted before this date are still gone).

If you have a good reason (such as providing missing copyright information that caused the image to get deleted in the first place), try asking the deleting admin (may not have been me, I often tag images that others delete, check the deletion log to see who deleted it and why). You can also seek a consensus to overturn any deletion at Wikipedia:Deletion review.

Archived talks:
/3 Jun 2005 - 30 November 2005 | /2 Dec 2005 - 20 Feb 2006 | /21 Feb 2006 - 26 Aug 2006 | /29 Aug 2006 - 21 Nov 2006 | /22 Nov 2006 - 16 Apr 2007

Welcome!

Hello Sherool, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

-- Longhair | Talk 08:58, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use flag

You flagged this picture for lack of fair use rationale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:FiretruckEngineWIlt.jpg

It did have an explanation, I have added to the explanation, I hope it now suits you. 9/11. Historical event. Fair use. Melted engine. Look at it. Strange. Not going to happen again soon.

Zarcon 00:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dilated_pupils_rev.JPG.jpg

i got that image from another image already on wikipedia, how do I give copyright info for it? Use the force ^{(Talk * Contribs)} 17:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:Use the force. --Sherool (talk) 22:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My userpage

Thank you for updating my license tag for me! ZoFreX 03:54, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Badfinger image deletion

Sherool, I do not remember seeing a tag for deletion on the Badfinger image that was recently taken down. However, the image is that of a record album cover and CD cover from Apple Records. The album is called Straight Up. Licensing for this image shoudl be identical as any other album cover issued by Apple. I will be putting the image back up with the appropriate information. ZincOrbie 17:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:ZincOrbie. --Sherool (talk) 18:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Sherool. I didn't check the dates on the deletion log. There must be some other problem occurring because the article is not linking to the image. In any case, sorry for the distraction. ZincOrbie 18:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Military-insignia

Template:Military-insignia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Megapixie 03:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:Image:Nurburgring-1978-04-30-001.jpg

Since I can find no alternative, feel free to delete it anyway. Willirennen 13:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TFD of Pokemon image related templates

Hi! I wanted to personally let you know that I've requestied a DR of the descision made concerning the pokemon image templates you thought should be deleted. You can find it here. I also wanted to take the opportunity to let you know why I think the original nomination may have been misinformed. You first mentioned that the templates weren't used. Actually they were used and I'm happy to say that all the images that had been tagged with them were fixed :) (or deleted...) They were being retained for future use. The other point you made, which seemed to be the one you were most concerned about, was that these templates would have created "backlog forks". I wanted to talk this out with you, because I don't think that was happening. When I first made the templates (PokeImageNR and Poke-no source) I was not aware of the current cateogry scheme. Another person built upon my templates and incorporated nsd and nrd into them so that they not only would be in the Pokemon images subcategories, but also the ones maintained by admins. That way there would be no extra backlog, just more exposure. If the templates were restored i would delete the older versions after incorporating their code into Poke-nsd and Poke-nrd. Your last point, being redundant, I don't understand because I think that more exposure helps to get the images fixed. Additionally, people who know more about a specific subject (in this case, pokemon) are more likely to know where the uploader may have gotten their image, or be able to give it an accurate fair use rationale. The templates can create categories that can be promoted in a portal, or on a project's main page as Things To DO. you may still feel the way you did, but I hope that now you understand more about these templates uses. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 20:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment posted on Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 April 29. --Sherool (talk) 22:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commons "copyvio"

Just a heads up. I tagged Image:Wookipedia Logo.png as a copyvio on Commons per Commons:Derivative works. --Sherool (talk) 08:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC-5)

The image in question is listed at wikia:StarWars:Image:Wiki.png as GFDL. So why is there a problem? Is their image illegal? If so, where can I find a legal copy? Will (Talk - contribs) 22:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry if I was not clear enough. Yes the image is tagged as GFDL licensed on Wookipedia (so are a lot of other plainly non-free images, theyr admins seem to be having a hard time keeping it "clean"), but it also says it's based on a screenshot from Return of the Jedi. Unless the person who created the logo also own the copyright to Return of the Jedi then he does not have exclusive rights to the work and can not release it under the GFDL. They can probably make a fair use case for the logo, but Commons does not accept fair use. --Sherool (talk) 18:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC-5)

So what can I use instead? I am also asking at the Wookipedia Senate Hall. Will (Talk - contribs) 02:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW: The Wookiepedia thread is Wikia:Starwars:Forum:Can't use Wookipedia logo in Wikipedia user box if you want to respond there.

Archive time

You might want to archive your talk page. I had problems loading the entire page. Will (Talk - contribs) 02:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invisible pink unicorn logo

In what manner of violation do you find my userbox usage of Image:Invisible Pink Unicorn Logo.svg? The image is under copyright and used with permission: "Redistribution and use, with or without modification, for commercial and non-commercial purposes alike, are permitted provided that the IPU logo is used to represent atheism." ~ Booya ^Bazooka 02:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:Booyabazooka. --Sherool (talk) 11:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Tone

Do not post orders on other people's talk pages. This is not the military, and you are not an officer. This is not a business, and you are not the CEO. Adjust your attitude. Kwertii 22:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HELP: PREPARE FOR SPEEDY DELETION

I am the author of this page as you can see on the history... i am SHEPHERDS and i want this page to be deleted immediately. There is no such thing as Lord's Shepherds Academy. As you can see it has no reference or even a source. It is also an advertisement even so it is not true. I the creator of this page has just invented such thing like the hot fm and Lord's Shepherds Academy. Please prepare this page and also the one 91.1 Hot FM for speedy deletion. Thanks. Again I say I am the author of this page as I started it and edit all of its content and this page is just an imagination. thanks

--Shepherds 05:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)--Shepherds 05:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lord's Shepherds Academy

Most of the work seems to have been done already, removed a few links to the articles and a couple of images. --Sherool (talk) 09:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That list...

Would you be able to search that 10MB list you made using AWB and WPBiography links to find all the people with "Fry" in their names? I'd like to compare the success of that method with other ones. If you could post the results of the search at the template talk page, that would be really great. Thanks. Carcharoth 00:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, well the actual results are at User:Sherool/Fry list to avoid cluttering that talk page. --Sherool (talk) 10:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That is really helpful. Carcharoth 00:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

div syntax

Sorry to bother you further with this: Could you point me to any pages related to div syntax, couldn't find anything useful. —Alde Baer 15:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:AldeBaer. --Sherool (talk) 16:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, many thanks! I combined it with a third div layer (I never understood that those are layers), to make it span the entire screen width. Take a look at my userpage. Thanks again. —Alde Baer 17:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, one more reason to switch, although IE is somehow getting better and better with each shamelessly copied feature... Anyway, I'm not going to put that trick into any article, just my userpage. —Alde Baer 18:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Akirayamaoka.png

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Akirayamaoka.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sherool (talk) 14:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to do with me, I just optimised the image. Please notify the uploader, who may know the image's copyright. --Tene 16:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I've notified the original uploader now. --Sherool (talk) 17:25, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted images

Well, there go those images from the Forchtenberg page. Getting sick of the number of times I've BEGGED for help on how to flag an image so that some bean-counter somewhere finally allows me to use it. As stated many times already: the wikipedia instructions on images are a quagmire of confusing regulations. You go round and round in circles.

They SERIOUSLY need simplifying.

Anyway, you don't make the rules, so no hard feelings. But it would be nice to understand what the hell I'm doing wrong!!— Preceding unsigned comment added by BuzzWoof (talk • contribs) 16:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:BuzzWoof. --Sherool (talk) 18:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS for your reply. At last some feedback that made sense! I have tons of pictures of the place I took myself. Will post. Thank you for investing the time to sort this out. If only the rules made it that clear! They talk round and round in circles to cover off all eventualities, instead of doing what you did: say is as it is! BuzzWoof 10:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can delete Image:Vfp15.jpg whenever you see fit. I used to have it up on my user page but I've since taken it down. It was taken in Kamtchatka BTW. Cheers Vincent 17:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Military insignia

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Brig.bmp, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Sherool (talk) 16:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC) Also nominated Image:Lieu_gen.bmp, Image:Col.bmp, Image:Lieu_col.bmp, Image:Gen.bmp, Image:Major.bmp, Image:Capt.bmp, Image:Lieu.bmp, Image:Warrant_c1.bmp, Image:Sergeant.bmp, Image:Corporal.bmp and Image:Lance_cor.bmp. --Sherool (talk) 16:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dainamo"

I do not understand as this image displays an insignia of a rank in the British Army. International law requires these for combatant identification which therefore makes copyrighting rank insignias in violation of international law. This means the image is in the public domain. This applies worldwide. Dainamo 11:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to apply the template at [1] and would be grateful to know how this is done as when I click on the template or go into edit the image page I do not know where the template comes from. This will really only be of use to me on other pages since there is another another image for this insignia in use use and fit for purpose, this file can be deleted Dainamo 11:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:Dainamo. --Sherool (talk) 11:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Orphanded GFDL presumed images.

Hi. Thanks or the message yesterday. Sadly, I wasn't there to attend to the bot at that time or I would have stopped it. I now have a mess to clear up. I am thinking of the best way to approach it. Should I mark images with the tag uploaded after 1st Jan 2006 as speedy or should I send them to IfD? I will remove the orphan tags of-course.

Could you please comment here. I don't want to make any mistakes this time before I let my bot loose :) Template:GFDL presumed warning tells the users that their image would be deleted only after 7 days, whereas in sending tagging the images as CSD:I3 would not give them sufficient time. But tagging these images for IfD would create a huge backlog there. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. --Sherool (talk) 13:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles discography

Would you agree that the Beatles discography is a sufficiently detailed and encyclopedic piece of work that in this case the images should stay? -- it's far more than just a list of albums or a gallery of images. Jheald 16:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:Jheald. --Sherool (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I'm not saying there should be detailed commentary there. But I think the covers are appropriate and more than justified in such an encyclopedic presentation of the body of work. Jheald 17:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Pioneer-logo.png

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Pioneer-logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Concentracionchavista13deabrilde2007.jpg

The image personally takes it with my digital camera.Bye.--K4zem 10:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or, I added this as the source infor for the image, please take care to add this on future uploads, thanks. --Sherool (talk) 10:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Voodoo5 6000

I have added a fair use rationale for this image. *** Crotalus *** 00:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Twin Peaks' Giant

Thanks for the info on Image:Twin_Peaks_The_Giant.jpg, I had some troubles with the fair use but now I thinks it's good. Or is it? Is the tag now removable? Thanks, Insist 19:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:Insist. --Sherool (talk) 19:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Thanks. I will enhanche the information and style to meet the Wikipedia standards! Insist 19:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Work_of_Oscar_Niemeyer.jpg

Hi, this picture (more accurately, it's thumbnail version) was copied to nl: 2 years ago (nl:Afbeelding:180px-Work-of-Oscar-Niemeyer.jpg). A fellow Dutch wikipedian (nl:User:KameraadPjotr) obtained permission from the original author (was an sxc.hu picture). Could you please undelete it, so I can move it to Commons? Cheers, Niels|en talk-nl talk (faster response)| 16:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:NielsF. --Sherool (talk) 17:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, will do that. My post here seems to have been at about the same time as the uploading of a larger image by KameraadPjotr. Anyway, thanks for checking! Niels|en talk-nl talk (faster response)| 17:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry. I was just trying to help (with the stub template). But about the userpage, I don't understand why I can't use the screenshot if its also in another article.—GalacticExplorer 22:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on User talk:Galactic Explorer. --Sherool (talk) 10:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Marty Schottenheimer.jpg‎;

Had copyright information listed , it is clearly a head shot and is expressly released by the S.D. Chargers for publicity purposes. A fact that was noted and complies with free use guide lines in place please tell me why you don't agree. Thank you in advance. You site the fact that the source is listed Wireimage and the fact that they make money for taking photos is not a issue here. The N.F.L. pays them to take these photos for publicity purposes. The photos are listed as free on both the wireimagine web page in this size and quality and on the Charger web page. This is a official photo and all rights are expressly National football league and no free rights image exist that are official other than these listed to my knowledge. Turner/Schottenheimer are famous coach's /people and these photo's are germane to the Chargers and the article.

I do struggle to comprehend deletes when every effort is made to comply with all policies. The very point of Wikipedia and our ability to capture history and supply factual information for generations to come is a serious issue and one that should not be taken lightly.

Pictures and images are part of the story please don't get carried away in your edit numbers thanks. RMANCIL 14:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]