User talk:Jkelly/Archive07

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#August 4 - Image:Body everywhere.jpg

Mib has responded by providing a secondary source. However there is already a secondary source listed on the picture's entry. What the picture needs is primary source evidence to justify the fair use tag that was originally in place - am I correct? John Smith's 00:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I also have some websites that refute the status of the picture. Take a look if you would like to learn more about the problems with them. [1][2] John Smith's 12:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The discussion has got rather messy. I'm not sure what to do now. What's your opinion? John Smith's 22:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

What would happen after the discussion is moved? You said that it has been confirmed the picture is unfree, so what does that mean for the deletion process? I'm just a bit confused here, that's all. John Smith's 22:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok. The only issue is that I'm sure Mib isn't going to agree it isn't fair use. As he is an administrator, how can the issue be resolved?

On first glance, I'm not sure how it can be fair-use. After all, it doesn't really serve any purpose other than that people died during the Sino-Japanese war - during the Nanking Massacre if it is accepted to be part of those events. Any other picture indicating the deaths of Chinese could be used instead. John Smith's 22:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

As an administrator, what happens if Miborovsky refuses to admit the picture is not fair use? The same applies to those pictures that I listed on WP:IFD. Is there a different group of administrators that decide on what to do with pictures, or can he block/revert any deletion? I just have a bad feeling he isn't going to let this dispute go. He's making snide comments again, this time on WP:IFD. John Smith's 09:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I think Miborovsky and myself have hit a stone wall. We can't agree, so we really need a more impartial view to help decide whether the picture is fair use or not. John Smith's 11:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

RfC re use of computer icons

Hi, could you swing by Talk:Dark Castle if you have time? The discussion concerns use of software computer icons for identifying a product in addition to packaging art, which seems to be bordering on excessive. Thank you. Combination 10:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Correllian Nativist Church article...

hi there

i hope my revisions to the Correllian Nativist Church talk page have been helpful. When would it be appropriate for me to move the revisions to the actual article itself?

thanks, Htwicce333 19:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

• I'd say go ahead and be bold. Jkelly 19:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks!!! Htwicce333 19:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Image Image:Anti-War Exhibition in Place de l'Étoile Beirut.jpg

Jkelly, you deleted the copyrighted image Image:Anti-War Exhibition in Place de l'Étoile Beirut.jpg, citing "WP:CSD I3 -- incompatible license (no derivative use)," yet WP:CSD I3 says ""No commercial use" or "by permission" images uploaded after target date." The permission to use this image by the copyright holder has no such restrictions. This appears to be a disconnect -- would you please clarify? AdamKesher 02:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

...

why did you say that about my best article? it is awesome. it is one of the best i have done man.Brohanska 05:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Image

Please look at the history and discussion pertaining to Image:Gandhi Boer War 1899.jpg. All source information etc has been available since the day of uploading. Regards, 67.20.232.184 16:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use

Hi. I responded to your original point on Image:Body everywhere.jpg. I can't see how it is fair use, because it shows alleged events of the Nanking Massacres, not a specific massacre, etc. It would be like taking a single picture of an athlete running a race, when others had been taken, and saying that because it showed a particular snap-shot of the race it couldn't be replaced. In reality, you could show another picture from a few seconds later. John Smith's 18:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Licorice

Judging from his/her contributions, this is probably a prankster to be blocked (nice try, though). In fact, in the article licorice there is a reference to Macedonia and to the licorice historian Alvin Hosenfeld, but this guy seems to have never existed and, therefore, we are probably dealing with a wiki hoax. Politis 19:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Images

Why have you listed

• SLebanon-gasStation.jpg
• EL-KHIAM-UN-PHOTO.jpg
• IsraeliForeignMinistry-HumanitarianCorridors2006.jpg

as copyright problems? I received permission from the author of the images to use them on wikipedia! Didnt you read that on the image tagging? 82.29.227.171 21:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Why did you revert the edits I made to the images? Do not vandalise the copyright material on the photographs understand? Mema435 22:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

As it clearly states on the image summary for the images you vandalised I asked for and received permission from the creator of the photographs via Flickr, the creator has waived their copyright. Did you not read that in the image summary? Mema435 22:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

So the images are incorrectly tagged meaning that you, instead of advising on tags, you report them all as 'copyright violations'? I will contact the creator of the images currently hosting on flickr and meantime tag them {{No rights reserved}} then ammend the copyright details on the foreign ministry image to that appearing here [3] Mema435 22:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I updated each image you wrongly labeled 'copyright violations' to read that the author has waived their rights. I will also ask them to send email ala [4]. It is a shame you didnt mention this before here where you raised the issue [5].

I updated the Israeli foreign ministry picture with a new tag and rationale per the IDF image- same law applies. Mema435 22:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I wrote to him/her saying: "Hello, Is it possible I can use some of your images for wikipedia articles? The articles are about bombing in lebanon on civilian areas. A problem is that only images available are press agency and they are restricted on wikipedia due to copyright. I'm hoping you can waive the copyright on some of your images to allow them to be uploaded to wikicommons- full credit to you as photographer and your web presence will be given. Is it possible?"

The user wrote back: "sure. be my guest. M" So they appear ok with it, then I wrote to them explaining where the images were: "That is very kind of you, thanks. I have placed some of the images you created in these articles: [6] and [7] You can of course remove or delete the image at any time and I will also do this for you if needed. Credit has been given to you as 'Masser' with a link to flickr. Thanks again"

Mema435 23:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

OK I understand that and have written to them explaining and providing the link to [8] asking that they fill it in and send it off if they agree to the T&C. I'm pretty sure that UN picture is also ok and i notice that the UN picture of kofi annan is also UN picture so I will update the picture of the base with that rationale. Mema435 23:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I dont understand, the fair use policy states "we must permit some non-free material for critical commentary". There are no other images to represent the destruction of the base that im aware of that can do that nevermind any that are free. The photo in the UN article of the base prior to the attacks is probably also originally a UN photo. Mema435 23:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello again, the author has changed the license on the respective Flickr images to by-nc-sa CreativeCommons [9]. Is it ok to change the tags on the images hosted at wikipedia to CC-BY-SA? Mema435 13:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

To test this I put another image at Car&roadBeirut2006.jpg, please look it over and let me know if this is the way to proceed. Thank you. Mema435 17:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Great, Thanks for your help. Sorry for getting upset about the images. I understand it better now and have sourced a few more to put on commons- will plough ahead with that now. Mema435 17:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, the Masser photographer agreed to sharealike license for those specific photos so I uploaded them all again with correct licensing. Mema435 12:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Image Names

I think it is more in line wihtWikipedia guidelines to first ask permission befoe you upload somebod ele's photo to Wikimdia commons. You can do it legally, but it's uncourteous - and we reallyneed to try and pay each other respect and courtes. Lastly, rnaming the name of a photo that I, THE PHOTOGRAPHER, named, is bad form, because you were not thereand I was, and I named the photo perfectly what it should be named. I make a request, that you do not re name photos for which you WERE NOT AN EYEWITNESS. It's fine fr photos 100 years ago, etc., but that rally was NOT over Qana;Qana was just the straw that broke thecamel' back. I named it was most accuratl named. Thank you. --DavidShankBone 05:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I have purposely licensed my photographs so that they can be edited and used by others. What I took exception to (in a garbled message when it was very late) was renaming an image--on a controversial topic--that wasn't an accurate name, and then re-uploading it onto that controversy's page. I don't grasp the value you saw in that; perhaps it was to put the date in. I don't think I would typically care--say, if you took my CompaySegundoHotelNacional.JPG and renamed it "CompanySegundoPlaying Guitar" or something. I apologize for my tone above and I purposely didn't edit it because it shows I was tired (and had come home after a night out...). But on some of the more controversial topics, you may want to think twice before renaming photos. Otherwise, after having looked at your contributions, I'd like to say, Keep up the good work.--DavidShankBone 16:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

You're more than welcome to upload any of my photos to Wikimedia Commons and you are welcome to put the dates in, as well. You can change the titles if you think there is a more accurate reflection of the photograph. Thanks again for your efforts on cleaning up the site; yes--add some images; landmarks and other features in the area you live is a fun project, I'm finding. For the first time since a 5th Grade class trip, I'm a New York tourist. --DavidShankBone 16:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I haven't really taken a look at the Commons, but I will do so. I've enjoyed exploring buildings, trying to find nooks and crannies and artwork. I never replace photos (though I may shrink them if they aren't as good, and move them around). New York hospitals are on my list of "To Do", but taken from that same day was the Beth Israel Medical Center in Union Square: Image:UnionSquareBethIsrael.JPG Wait until I begin my authors series (a lot of authors do readings at bookstores here, and few of them have photos on their entries). I have a packed schedule this month. Gay Talese, Tommy Chong, Jennifer Egan, Wendy Williams.... --DavidShankBone 16:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

J Kelly eh?

Pardon me for asking, but your name popped up on the Wikipedia Signpost and I just have to ask: does the J by any chance stand for "Jennifer"? —this is messedrocker (talk) 05:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, then you're not someone I know. —this is messedrocker (talk) 16:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: discussion

Are you in the proces of moving the discussions to the talk page? If so i will not revert you.. Matthew Fenton (contribs) 19:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Nm, noticed you did it a couple of seconds after i sent message. Matthew Fenton (contribs) 19:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Randallflaggandmordreddt7.jpg

I reuploaded it under a different name. After howcheng deleted it, I discussed it with him, and he told me to reupload it for discussion. I have sent a message to artist Michael Whelan to see if having images is a problem. If it is, I will remove it. I have talked to him before so I know I should get a response.--CyberGhostface 23:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean? That was made from a customizable template for images that don't follow the blanket preestablished categories.--CyberGhostface 23:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Re Image copyright problem with Image:QanaII.jpg

I formally asked for and received permission from the copyright holder to use that image. Now, just tell me what to do in order to keep it as i still have the permission? -- Szvest 09:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Benzmit

Howdy, thanks for the note the other day regarding tagging the recent uploads of Benzmit (talk • contribs). Unfortunately, it appears s/he is back at it again, with another 50 or so images, many of which are obviously not free, (they seem to all be tagged {{self2}}): see Image:Cardsharp1977-img427x600-11550098083.jpg or Image:New mann.jpg. I could go though them and list them at WP:PUI, however this seems like more an issue of willfully ignoring correct tags (s/he's been warned about this before) and fairly clear cut incorrect tagging. What would you suggest as a course of action? Many thanks, --TeaDrinker 08:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

General question about fair-use policy

I'm having some difficulty finding a photo for my FAC on Hilary Putnam. I have emailed him and asked for permission to use his image under the GDFL, bit have not received a response yet. Is it permissible to use a book-cover, as in the case of W.V.O. Quine, with a fair-use rationale of some sort??--Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 11:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Ketuanan Melayu

Someone mentioned your name in connection with this article's FAC and its images. Since the objector never bothered to respond to my request for clarification, I thought I'd drop you a line. Johnleemk | Talk 21:27, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried to clarify the copyright status of the first image many moons ago (last year actually), but the source (Jeff Ooi) did not return my emails. I contacted the editors of Malaysiakini, who are connected to Ooi and the local journalism community, but they said they've never seen such a version of the photo before. Would it be safe to say that Ooi holds the copyright? I'll try to see if the textbook I scanned Image:Protest against Malayan Union.jpg from credits the copyright owner. As for Image:Gerakan celebrate after 1969 election.jpg, it likely belongs to the Gerakan party, since it came from their official website. I don't know how we can address Image:Bumi discount mod.jpg, but it depicts a typical real estate advertisement for the purposes of discussing economic policies, so I'm not sure how it could be substituted with text. Johnleemk | Talk 14:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Problem

Hello again, you are the only admin ive encountered so far. Do you know what the procedure is when confronted with an edit war? There is a used here that is continually reverting despite opposition to his changes, I am using the user User Talk:RandomGalen to edit there and have tried to canvas some support for the nondeletion of the detail but the user continues to engage in edit warfare. Mema435 11:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Images

Incidentally, I'm tempted to write one of these things. A nice short one; "Please make sure that none of the images in your "best of Wikipedia" work are candidates for speedy deletion. It's really only about two minutes of effort." Jkelly 01:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but then how are you going to get image dummies like me to figure out which images are candidates for speedy deletion? <grin> It won't compute. Sandy 01:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Ecclesiastical heraldry

I see you tagged the two images for deletion. They are the only two eastern coats of arms I could find on wiki. I found the source for the more critical one. What do I need to do here? Gimmetrow 01:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

So you are basically saying I need to paint one myself and scan it? I bought up the two eastern images at the start of the FA, then again in the middle, and was told that "2-3 fair use images are fine." So I feel somewhat offended by this. Gimmetrow 01:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, you did post that immediately after commenting on my FAC. Sequence is not causality but I'm sure you understand the inference. Anyway, I have spent quite a bit of time going through the COA images here and commons, and haven't found anything else to work with. Some of the categories are my work-product, even. The difficulty with these arms is that they use the "robe of estate" or manteau; that alone is rare enough that I doubt heraldry software supports it. Then there would be the appropriate hat, etc.Gimmetrow 01:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I must say, the fair use policies and image tagging systems seem too inscrutably byzantine even for me. The pages are difficult to find and not well connected. I guess I'll try to find an image in a book published before 1923. That would work right? Would coats of arms of a state church fall under public domain as official seals of a state authority for certain Slavic countries? While I'm here, I asked on WP:AN for someone to review Image:GLKStamps.jpg after the clearing of fair use stamp images, but saw no response. It's been tagged for deletion three times, but the stamp people apparently don't like using {{Stamp}} for unofficial stamps. Uploader seems to think it is public domain, but I have doubts. Gimmetrow 03:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

While the Serbian image was serving double duty, I've removed both of the offending images. I had been trying to get mostly newer books since much changed in the 1960s and 1970s. It will take time for requests for older books to come through. I would rather not hold up the FAC for this, as it has adequate pictures at the moment. I guarantee any future images added to the article will be PD (probably PD-old), and will notify you for review if you wish.

I am also considering drawing/painting some images myself. If so, I would want attribution and the exclusion of derivative works. Before I put in the time painting, is there a license that guarantees attribution and forbids further modifications (except maybe cropping and lower-resolution images)? Gimmetrow 15:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Text is easy to change, the WP system couldn't have a non-derivative license there. It's unfortunate WP doesn't allow non-derivative licenses for images though. When you have a chance could you point me to some explanation of why? Next question, it turns out there are a few old polish heraldry books that were reprinted, some completely and some with plates of the original diagram pages. The original books are old; are they PD? What about reproductions of the complete pages in other books? Gimmetrow 21:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I guess Raul got tired seeing this in the FAC list. Thanks for the help. You were sort of there at the start of this article two months ago, too. Reminder is at the top of my talk page. Gimmetrow 06:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Harper

Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Steveharper-outlook.jpg

What evidence would be sufficient?

CalgaryTower 02:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

It is a scanned copy from the archives of the youth association (probably one of the few copies left in existence). The original is sitting on my shelf. CalgaryTower 03:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The original photograph belongs to the Alberta PC Youth Association. Couldn't say who the original photographer was (seeing as it was taken over 20 years ago), but photo itself is owned by the Alberta PC Youth, which does not assert any claims of ownership over it. You could contact the youth group directly for verification. CalgaryTower 03:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

If this continues to be unsatisfactory, perhaps you could suggest a better tag. CalgaryTower 03:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Yep, you got it. The photographer released the rights to the youth group, who released the rights years and years ago (probably at least 10-15 years ago). The current youth president (Dave McColl) can be contacted at PC Alberta Calgary Office, Phone: 403-244-8528. CalgaryTower 03:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Jzg's page

Don't know if I should give any more mention to it on AN/I, but see also 64.34.168.29 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Garion96 (talk) 03:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Bagan.png

Hi, the image is the Burmese characters for the city of Bagan in Burma. Thanks. Kirkland1 16:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Peacekeeping photos

Why did you replace the photos for the Peacekeeping article? As was stated on each image page, the UN permits non-commercial use that credits the UN (it states so here). --Tjss(Talk) 17:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Reality TV

Kelly, could you weigh in here with an opinion. I'd like to get an idea of a consensus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Deletion_policy#Reality_Telvision_Contestants --DavidShankBone 22:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

A new guideline?

I would value your input on a topic I have raised at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. Specifically, I have frequently encountered a set of issues on biographies of academics that are somewhat narrower and more specific than for generic "biographies of living persons". I am thinking that it might be time to propose a guideline about this, or maybe just an essay on the topic. But before I try to float that, I'm interested in what you think. LotLE×talk 05:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

deleted thermographical images

Hi Jkelly,

Sorry I made a mistake uploading images. I reloaded the polar bear because I thougt I made a mistake with the naming. Before I started I mailed with Samsara, of the biology portal and he suggested the Creative Commons licence. I used this type of licence allready, because they are ment for low/no budget educational organisations.

I think the images add interesting information, specially about topics like: thermoregulation, cold-blooded, warm-blooded, energy-efficiëncy tools of nature.

What kind of licence from the list is prefered?

Greetings,

Arno

Hi Jkelly,

I think I understand the CC-problem. Thermographics are a little strange. The source is more like a database of temperatures (80.000 measurements) than an image. The jpg or bmp files are like extracts of this database. You can choose a lot of colorpalettes or even design your own palette and change the temperature scale. This means that you can extract lots of different jpg's from one single thermograph. If I make a collection of copyleft "unique" extracts, e.g. in the black-and-white or purple/yellow palette and don't put these images on www.nutscode.com, would that be sufficiënt?

Greetings,

Arno

Hello again,

We are the original creators of the "basefiles" (a lot of fun), it's a coproduction of two free-lancers. I'll check the pages were I put a thermograph and remove the image border and description. I can make a special wiki-page on www.nutscode.com, were I can put unique abstracts under a free to use licence. I'll have to make a selection though otherwise we create our own competition.

Greetings,

Re: Wikipedia

I really don't know. Revert if you'd like. --Pilotguy ^{(roger that)} 01:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

thanks

Jkelly, thanks for your suggestion on the admin board. I posted a message on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics. The page has now been protected. Best wishes and happy editing. Travb (talk) 14:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks and question

Thanks for deleting my lemonade stand images. I never asked the individuals in those images for their permission to use the photos, but it was in a public setting. Could those images have been released into the public domain? Thanks!--Lord of the Ping 05:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

2005 Planets

I meant 2006, but 2005 is a good year too.

Hey man, I used to work at NASA. These days information is so abundant that my $800k paying salary at Nasa just rules. Anyway.

Are you Rkelly? PISS ON YA.

Hey man uhm but why did you post a warning on my talk page?

DO YOU NOT KNOW IM A GREAT PERSON? IM THE GREAT JOHN CHO, A GREAT ASSETT TO THE WIKIPEDIA COMMUNITY.

How dare you contradict my greatness!!

<3 ----John Cho 05:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Since 4 tidles my sig, 4 lines also are good.

It is also good for the next Fourth Reich (the next Third Reich.) Vierte Reich. Sieg heil.

Re : Talk:V for Vendetta (film)

I'm a bit amused by your latest reply at the talkpage, because it is something too trivial (pun not intended) to get into some form of dispute at WP:FAR. Furthermore most of the points at the trivia section are mere duplicates at other parts of the article, so I've fixed it in my spare time (use the diff comparison [10] to see what I mean). Hopefully that would be fine for all parties. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 08:23, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

• Perhaps I haven't got accustomed to this FAR thing, but I personally think like PR, FAR wouldn't actually garner much response on this sort of "trivial issues" (i.e. by precedent of FARC, people usually respond only with the threat of de-feature). By the time it goes through the meat-grinder (FARC), it would seem like an overkill, having personally came across other FAs that are much worse. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 16:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Christine Jennings

Thanks for the message. Please be aware that when I made that edit I was very aware that it could be controversial so I immediately contacted the user and alerted an administrator so they could deal with it. As it happens, they reverted the article to remove the controversial content. I'm reckless, but I'm not that reckless. The article is, I think, referring to this article in American Reporter. This is only available through the Google cache. Maybe Jennings has got in touch with them too, and they removed the article from their page? Can I use it as a reference? --Jim (Talk) 23:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks JK. As I said on the Admin noticeboard, it appears that the information was added to the article en masse by an IP address in Tampa, so I begin to believe the argument that it was an attempt to libel Jennings. The IP address restored the stuff from American Reporter a couple of times in July and August. Interestingly, User:Johnjohnnyjr also restored the information at one point, and the only other edit he made was to Jan Schneider. Is this who Jennings is running against, by any chance?? Any way of working out what IP address Johnjohnnyjr was editing from? Either way, it looks like a lawyer or a banker is going to Congress, which will make a change... --Jim (Talk) 23:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I think you're right. In terms of preparation, would it be possible to make a category which would include all of the candidates for whatever is going on in November (I'm in Scotland, so don't know the ins and outs of American poltics). I guess semi-protection of all candidate pages would be against the spirit of WP, but this might work. Perhaps a mod could be made for Vandal Proof so that all articles in the "candidates" category would flag up when they were edited, so we could keep better track of them? --Jim (Talk) 00:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

LMFAO! The last edit to Jan Schneider was made by 72.77.137.119; see the diff. That IP also made this edit to Christine Jennings, and can be traced to... go on, have a guess.... pool-72-77-137-119.tampfl.dsl-w.verizon.net. ie, the same IP for the person claiming to be from Jenning's campaign earlier on... looks like WP is a political battleground already... --Jim (Talk) 00:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Cheers. I've created the category and added Schneider and Jennings to it. I've also put it a request at Vandal Proof to see if they can add the feature to their software. Do you know where I could get a list of precisely who the candidates are for the midterms? --Jim (Talk) 00:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks once again! One final question - do you know of a tool that allows one to add a category to aa batch of articles in one fell swoop? It would sure save a lot of time...

Wow, AWB looks neat - should certainly do the job. I doubt it will be too much bother, once the list is copied over from wikia. I might see if I can get some other editors to help share the load. Thanks one last time for all your help, Jim (Talk) 01:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

thanks for the heads up

Thanks for the heads up JKelly, have a wonderful day! Travb (talk) 01:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use magazine covers

I've been involved in the magazine covers "discussion" over on the Wikipedia talk:Fair use page, and there hasn't been any more comment for a while after the proposal by FastFission. I'm wanting to think that means we've come to sort of an agreement, and that we should look into some policy changes. How do we get that started? Lauren 20:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Qana photo - my message to ChrisO

Hey JKelly - here is what I wrote ChrisO about the Qana photo. Thanks for the revert.

Hey ChrisO - I'd appreciate if you left the image up. First, the rally was on 8/3 in reaction to the Qana bombing--although the protest didn't slice and dice the Israeli bombing campaigns (when do they?). Second, that page, as you know, has been something of a warzone itself and aside from the fact that tweaking it may incite tempers that have cooled, it is also remarkable that nobody tried to take it down before. Which means that it does carry some legitimacy with the editors on the page (I am not one; I only supplied the photo). --DavidShankBone 02:07, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you take a look at this

User:NLOleson placed a POV tag on Religious pluralism. I then put a notice on his talk page that he should also place a reason for it on the talk page [11]. Nothing bad, and nothing to attack him, just hoping that he could post his reasons so we could improve the article. Since then he's been uncivil to me, and I've removed the content on my talk page [12] and [13], but no doubt he'll be back. I was wondering if you could take a look and see if there are any comments you could add. Thanks, -- Jeff3000 02:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

User 999 seems to have exremely poor judgment and is overly emotional

I am surprised you would suggest him as a competent editor. He seems unaware of Wikipedia policies. I would assume you have not reviewed the relevant talk pages and Tom-the-hand comments, as surely you would not suggest 999 as any kind of competent editor if you had done so. Mattisse(talk) 02:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Your image question to Telex

Hi, just happened to see your question to Telex re el:Εικόνα:Thessaloniki view.jpg and thought I'd answer for him as he's not much around these days. According to the image page on el.wiki it's own work by the Greek user who uploaded it there, el:User:SkarmoutsosV alias Βαγγέλης Σκαρμούτσος. I'd say that makes it safe to assume it's under GFDL, isn't it? Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Done. GFDL confirmed and uploaded on commons: Image:Thessaloniki view.jpg. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Qana protest nyc.jpg

I'd have appreciated it if you could have asked me before you deleted the image. I'd already asked the photographer if he's willing for it to be licensed as CC-BY-SA, which he is - I do check these things before using them, you know!. -- ChrisO 07:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Another appeal for help on images

Hi, Jkelly. The images, copyright, and Fair Use issues still escape me. Where specifically do I deal with Image:Chavezsurvivescoup.JPG, which is taken from the BBC ? The BBC does not allow this, according to its webpage. Isn't there a faster way to deal with these sorts of things, considering the backlog on the Copyright page? I continue to come across images that were lifted from other webpages, and I don't know what to do with them. This is just one example. Here's another BBC example: October1993crisis.jpg‎ Thanks for any help, Sandy 12:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, JK. It really is a messed up situation, because none of these images have (or likely will have) valid Fair Use rationale, and we should be able to deal with this easier. I've just found another one, uploaded by the same editor (172). Image:R2157456581.jpg uploaded from Reuters. They are all taken from sources which make money off of their images and don't allow use of their copyright pics. Isn't there a faster way to get rid of multiple violations from the same user? Or should I do the same thing you did? And then, what is the next step? He will put up some Fair Use logic, and then where does it go next when they are clear copyright vios? Sandy 00:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

NAS placard

Query here for you in case you miss it; or we can discuss it elsewhere if you prefer. I'm keen to know how derivative work is being defined. News photographs of demonstrations often show placards, and show them in detail if they're controversial, which this one was, which is why it was photographed. There was a higher resolution version that I deliberately didn't download, though it was offered, in case it was such good quality that someone could, indeed, have made a poster out of it. So when does a photograph of a placard cease to be a derivative image of that placard i.e. what are the criteria that allow it to be claimed as largely or entirely the photographer's own work? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

(from PUI) A professional journalist wouldn't ask for a release in those circumstances because that placards like this are on display is seen as a matter of public interest i.e. a news issue. However, I take your point about the second matter i.e. that a journalist claims their use is not an infringement, but we would be claiming no other use is one. However, what if there were a version in which the image did not feature so prominently, so that it could not be cropped in the way you describe? Also, separate issue, are there free licenses that allow use so long as not cropped? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

from SV's talk page) I've responded at PUI. In terms of the larger issue, we have a sort of haphazard approach to derivative works. If I take a picture of a busy street, and there's a poster in a storefront window, we tend to ignore it. But if I take a picture of a poster, and it is clear that the subject of the photograph is the poster, we tend to delete it. There are plenty of cases in between these two where we just try to come to some sort of reasonable decision after discussion. Jkelly 18:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, understood. There are other images of this demo and the person holding the placard that might be more acceptable for the reasons you outline. The subject of the image is not simply the placard but the fact of it at a demonstration, so the subject is both, and the reason for using it both. I'll find the other versions and e-mail you the links. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

CoA

It is the 1912 arms, I have read though the archive and no artist is listed, apprently the name of the artist wasn't that important to the Australian governemt. However it is an accurate and docmented picutre of the arms, which is more than I can say for the one commons (the colouring is wrong and the dimensions are a bit weird too), and does not cause any copyright issues as it is the 1912 original. --Peta 02:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I should also add that it is a requirement of the Australian Government that the arms be reproduced in the correct colours and proportions, so the commons version is really not a good alternative. Read this if you want the dull detials.--Peta 02:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

The archive link on the image page provides those detail should someone want to sift through it again. I have found that you can't deep link into the archives.--Peta 02:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Coat of arms image for Australia

Hi, I just saw your comment to Peta re COA image - and I actually noticed on the diff that the image was coded incorrectly (which is no doubt why Peta changed it). If you change the code to

Image_coat = Australia coa.png|

this will work. Hope this helps :) - GIen 03:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Re : Edit summaries and the word vandalism

Hi! I received your msg, but you omitted to include an explanation as to what the reasoning and motivation was for you to send it at all. --Viogfernos 17:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Aforementioned user does not even give legitimate reason for the reinsertion of verification tags.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Viogfernos (talk • contribs)

Image information for Ron Saxton

Hello, I changed the picture for the Ron Saxton article after I recieved your message. The first picture was taken from the Oregon Secretary of State's office, but I don't have the exact link to the page the picture came from. Therefore, I found a more current photo and uploaded it with the proper information. The other one can be deleted as it is no longer in use. Davidpdx 07:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Need admin help!

Hi, Kelly. I need an admin to close a deletion discussion that has been going on a bit too long. The listing is here. It was five votes for merger, two to keep - so surely that's a consensus for merging. Joe has said he'll try and find someone, but in case he can't could you do it please? Thanks, John Smith's 21:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, my last post is a bit redundantnow. Some people jumped in at the last minute so I think the consensus has been disturbed. Still if it hasn't been closed I'd appreciate you to process it. Thanks again, John Smith's 23:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well thanks anyway. To be honest, the article would be deleted quite soon anyway because there isn't much merging to do. Hopefully someone will come along and decide that most of the content has been merged or something. Otherwise I'll rename the thing to include all the WWII powers - that way it should be quite fair enough. John Smith's 23:23, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Great news! They've re-direct the page to "war crimes". My faith in wikipedia procedure has vastly increased. :) John Smith's 21:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Saxton Image

I'm a bit confused what your asking for. The image was taken from the Oregon Secretary of State's office. Is this not something that is acceptable? Please let me know specifically what your asking. Davidpdx 09:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I have emailed the Oregon Secretary of State's office directly and will let you know the results when I get a reply. Davidpdx 17:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

I really appreciate it. Hey, how did you recognise me? Funk Junkie 16:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, right. Well, thanks again! Funk Junkie 18:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm mostly just adding the talk page points

Most of the pages have already been tagged. And on many of the talk pages, there are already comments that the article is POV or inaccurate or something like that. How does putting verify on pages that clearly need it be harmful, or adding to the talk page what they need to fix harm Wikipedia? I've been told that Wikipedia wants policies to be followed. Is that not true? GBYork 19:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Additional explanation

I'm adding that 999 (Talk) has already alienated my by the tactics he used on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip H. Farber which shocked me. That's what got me interested in this. The whole nominated deteriorated into a mess with him making personal attacks on the nomination and administrative complaints being filed, and the page been spammed. That's when I realized that something not normal was going on regarding 999 (Talk). I am aware of another situation where he had the same effect, though fortunately an administrator was forceful enough to override him. Once 999 (Talk) stopped the irrational supporting of a page creater that he didn't need citations, the creator came arround and in a day or two his article was immensely improved. There is an admin named Georg or something (don't have his link right now -- I'll have to find it -- who weighed in on how distructive 999 (Talk) is. So that is why I disregard anything he says. GBYork 19:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Please desist from personal attacks (i.e. "not normal", "irrational"). no personal attacks is a non-negotiable policy here at WP. -999 (Talk) 19:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

You could be right

If the nomination for afd would just get over and if I don't have to deal with 999 (Talk) anymore I will be more rational. Frankly, I've seen behavior like 999 (Talk) before, but have never been directly messaged by someone like him.

I'm certainly willing to back off. I know from reading messages to others that show up on my radar that 999 (Talk) is leading others in a move to prevent any correction of articles he knows are faulty. I fault myself for falling into the trap, but he is a very dangerous and disruptive force. And he encourages authors to do the wrong thing, which harms them.

But I will take a breather as you advice. I'm sick of the whole thing anyway. GBYork 19:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Removing unhelpful or disruptive content

I feel this is an important practice in situations like this[14]. But how do you feel about including a link such as this[15] in your notice of the removal.

In the future, when people are looking through the archives it will help alot, and also aids in transparency today. I am seeking your opinion on the matter, not trying to sway your methods. HighInBC 21:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Copyright law and Image:NewASAnti-Semiticposter.jpg

I just contacted someone about this image and I found out what I suspected all along- that in a picture of a public event like a protest that even if a single poster is the centerpeice of the picture, the only thing that is necessary is the permission of the copyright holder of the photograph, the person who created the original poster is irrelevant.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I am not an expert either, but the person I asked might fall into that category. I think that in normal cases, the creator of the original work would obviously be relevant. However, when someone creates a poster for a public event and someone takes a picture of that poster, then the photographer would generally be able to sell the photograph or do anything else he wants with it without contacting the original creator. Obviously this has its limits, the photographer would not be able to crop out everything else in the photograph and then sell the picture as an original of whatever is being displayed. However in the case of the picture that we talking about, it is clear that it falls in the case of the former and not the latter, so as long as we have the permission of the photographer then we are in the legal right. Since copyright law is generally part of federal law this does not change depending on the state jurisdiction. Although in the last 30 years this has gotten more complicated, by no stretch of the imagination would this be a cause of action).- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 01:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for the clarification. I thought you were suggesting the opposite.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 01:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thats what I was implying when I said "generally part of federal law", and that it has gotten more complicated in the last 30 years.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 02:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfinished work FAC

Thanks for your comments on the FAC for unfinished work. It seems that Raul654 decided that the nomination had gotten stale and, after many additions to the article, I have renominated it. Please take a look to see if it meets your approval. Thanks, violet/riga (t) 13:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thessaloniki

I really can't find out the copyright status of the image; I've checked, and it's not indicated. I think it would be best for you to ask someone else to look into it now, as I have very limited internet access and time at the moment. Thanks :-/ --Telex 21:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

King Vegita and Hanuman Das keeping Separate

That is unlikely to happen. He followed me onto the pages in question, from Thoth (which he may have followed me onto), in a cabal of him, User:SynergeticMaggot and User:999 who almost forced me off Wikipedia altogether until SynergeticMaggot talked me into coming back in real life. They had 3 articles I had spent much time on deleted, and stripped much of the rest. I have to rewrite the articles to get them reincluded and he's likely to be following me there opposing it.

KV(Talk) 21:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I also had them userfied for you. So please stop complaining everywhere you go. And we're not a cabal. SynergeticMaggot 22:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

pics removed from richmond ca

why did you remove the pictures of glenn plummer and divine brown? you say it because there is no faur use rationale here, but that is simply untrue, they were obviously being used to illustrate the Saw II actor Glenn Plummer and the sex worker divine brown their celebrity status and works (or actions in the public light) i think its rather vandalistic to romoeve them without first mentioning it on the talk page, that is if your too uninterested to find the rationale or put it in instead of removing them you could have asked someone to do it for you in the mean time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.78.14 (talk • contribs) 71.142.78.14 23:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC) Qrc2006 23:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

even the mugshot? i mean thats nearly public domain, no one gets sued for that, they use it like hot cakes—Preceding unsigned comment added by Qrc2006 (talk • contribs)

i suppose that is a rather extreme and uneccisary measure. Perhaps a better mode of action might be to deal simply with the Los Angeles County relevant statements since they are the relevant ones concerning the mugshot of Divine Brown and a precedant could be set to look into the individual county on a case-by-case fashion when a new county's mugshot is under consideration. thank you for your helpQrc2006 07:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply re 999

You have an opportunity to stand by your recommendation of 999 by voting Keep on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip H. Farber. Mattisse(talk) 09:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I really, really (!) don't appreciate censorship! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

You would be much more efective when you'll be ready to listen for once what I have to say concerning Skalic!

Just read this text under, and remove injust "protection" of Paul Skalic article

Paul Skalić

An Stbalbach user from believse Paul Skalic's nationality is controversal, although many distinctive slavists, linguists, croatists and other scientists think differently! Those "authoritative sources" mentioned by Stbalbach are Britannica and Encarta- but he is missing to point that these facts are actually very outdated hence there is, at least one very serious scientific work ( of mr. Zubrinic) that corroborate that Skalic is, in fact, really Croat. Also there is confirmation of Croatian Ministry of Science and Technology of that fact. On the end, I really don't know which "number of other editors" think same as he is. As I have seen, there was many controversy about this kind of text even before, so I think that you should remove this protection hence it is really unnecessary. It is only a new contribution to the evil blood between various editors, and not to mention that it seems that this looks like a censorship! If info. provided in the text is true/objective it would survive, if not... but that's the spirit of W.

Quote from Beebe

I have just noticed you have moved my quote from Beebe in the "Extinctions" article to Wikiquotes - which is fine - but I have added it to the Extinctions article again. If you don't think it is appropriate there - would you please let me know why? Many thanks, John Hill 01:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Quote from Beebe again

Thanks for your explanation on my Talk page. It makes sense to me - but how on earth do you find the quotes in Wikiquote? I have just given up trying - I must be missing something simple - which is not hard for me these days ;^)

Cheers, John Hill 06:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

images

By what right and for what reason are you renaming my photos in my namespace? Adam 03:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

If possible. Adam 03:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you do me a favor?

I need you to ban me. Indefinitely. (yes, I'm serious. I need to end the addiction). --FuriousFreddy 16:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know (sorry for the spaz). I just have this strong compulsion to edit articles anytime I see a mistake. It's almost unavoidable. I really should be trying to handle real-life problems...but...--FuriousFreddy 01:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sasha fundacion presskit.gif

Jkelly, howdy! Regarding the Sasha press kit picture: I produced and directed a biographic documentary film for Juan Carlos Plata, top goal scorer in the history of professional Guatemalan football (soccer). See the Biography on Film section at Juan Carlos Plata. The 94 minute film has an original soundtrack by DJ Sasha and the picture, was one of three publicity photos provided to me by Sasha's management at his agency Red Light. Hope this contribution gets this article closer to being a Featured Article. Any further questions, please drop me a line. -- Virgilrm 21:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Images on Pedophilia and child sexual abuse in fiction article

Hi. I see you've removed all the images in this article. I belive that it is OK to use book covers as fair use to illustrate articles and there are very few Wiki articles with no images. I see you have a regular interplay with other Wikipedians on removing/altering their images so I'd be grateful for an expalnation of your logic. We can all learn and as a responsible Wikipedian I'd be happy to offer a siuitable description on the images. Tony 11:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)Tony

Image:Dkilgour.jpg

Hi. This picture was questioned. I worked on Mr. Kilgour's campaign and I asked asked his permission personally. Dozens 19:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC) --Im confused, what should I have emailed to permissions AT wikimedia.org? Just simply that he gave me verbal acceptance. Sidenote, im sorta new and havent seen that guideline before. Where might I be able to familiarize myself better with those best practices? Dozens

Attacks by Viogfernos

Hi, I made the mistake of editing Francis Barrett, which Viogfernos had just done a fair bit of work on. I have also perhaps not behaved perfectly, saying "tush tush" in response to one of his insults left on my talk page. However he seems determined to cast me as the bad guy, and is now slandering me left, right and centre, accusing me of vandalism, and of being a spammer, a troll, and a "ne'r do well". He has completely rejected my attemps to draw a truce. He has reverted several constructive edits I have made, calling them "vandalism". I guess I'm asking for advice. I don't want to have to pussy-foot around him, and I don't want to waste huge amounts of time in edit wars or have my work arbitrarily reverted. I don't want to be painted as a miscreant either. What can I do now to resolve this problem, and what should I do in the future if I am insulted and vilified? Thanks again, Fuzzypeg☻ 00:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you kindly! Fuzzypeg☻ 01:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I didn't open the RFC immediately, but after further trouble I have opened it. Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Viogfernos. I wonder if you might add your name to certify it? Thanks, Fuzzypeg☻ 00:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

The RFC has been removed for lack of a second certification. I haven't heard a peep from Viogfernos for a while; I suppose I may as well just bide my time until he rears his head again? Or would you suggest I resubmit the RFC now? There's very little work involved this time, since I've already put it all together... Thanks Fuzzypeg☻ 22:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

What happened to the KerkyraDimarheio.jpg.JPG ?

Hi when I click on the City hall picture in the Corfu article it tells me that KerkyraDimarheio.jpg.JPG does not exist. Please let me know. Dr.K. 20:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yet it appears in the article and even you saw it. What's going on? Should I upload again? Dr.K. 20:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Dbuckner/Expert rebellion

You might find it of interest that you are labeled, by this page, as a user who is "discontented for [reasons] fundamentally similar [to] Wikipedia offers very little incentive for editors who wish to contribute to expert topics." AFAIK, you seem more or less still contented with Wikipedia. Just thought you might like to know. ;-) JesseW, the juggling janitor 22:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I will treasure the image/motto you put on my talk page. Much thanks and amusement. JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

See Before You Die images

I contacted the website through their contact form indicating that a user was uploading the pictures and claiming that they were free for any use. I asked them if they knew of such an activity, and if they approved of it, they had to e-mail permissions AT wikimedia DOT org. They wrote back (from site-manager-replay@SeeBeforeYouDie.net) to the permissions e-mail and a cc to me with the following e-mail:

Dear Wikipedia team,

Wikipedia user Dmwime got our permission to use images from See Before You Die inside Wikipedia.

In addition, any other Wikipedia user can use these images as long as a credit to See Before You Die will be added.

Regards,

BZ

See Before You Die.net

I don't know if permissions has received it or not, but it seems legit thus far. I've removed some of the urls in the pictures, but haven't completed them all. Is there anything else that needs to be done? -- Jeff3000 22:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Should I e-mail them again, telling them about the derivative use, and if they are ok with that? or just leave it be? -- Jeff3000 23:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

An images question

Hi, Jkelly, hope all is well. Another editor wants to nominate Tourette syndrome FAC (which I don't agree with yet, but it's not "my" article), and I've asked him to hold off. I was hoping, if you have time, you could take a look at the images there and see if they are up to snuff? If you have the time, I'd appreciate it. Thanks, Sandy 05:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the look at TS. I saw you removed Howard, and I went ahead and removed Malraux. Sandy 22:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Help Desk question

Hi JKelly, I have read in various places that you are an expert on images. While answering questions on the help desk, I came across this question. I tried to play around with the image on one of the articles that it is linked to. But was unable to get it to a proper shape. Request your help to do so. In case the page is watched by any other people, please feel free to answer here or on the help desk. -- Lost^(talk) 13:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The editor loaded a lower res image. I guess that was the problem. Works fine now -- Lost^(talk) 02:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked

No worries. Thank you for taking the time to respond anyway. :)Apro 12 September 2006

No derivative images - speedy?

Hi. I've asked a question at CSD which you might be able to help with. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Help

Hi! Could you revert the recent edits made by this user on Alicia Keys page for me? By the way, I'd like to know how to revert edits as well as to warn users about this kind of edits. Thanks! Funk Junkie 18:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I'll take a read at that. Funk Junkie 18:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Jill Kelly

Did you notice this little dig at you? [16] Jim Douglas 22:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

And one more parting shot here [17]; he seems to have gotten bored with us, for now at least. Jim Douglas 22:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you take a look at this

Hi Jkelly, I was wondering if you could take a look at the actions of a specific user User:RoddyYoung over the past month. He has an obsession with adding information about YouTube to random articles. The process started when he added a paragraph about Baha'i content on YouTube, which really has no Encyclopedic value, claiming that because thousands of people have downloaded a Baha'i video that it somehow becomes a fundamental aspect of the Baha'i Faith. After being blocked for a 3RR for adding the content he started adding an external link to Baha'i content. These links didn't really pass WP:EL (We did tell him that specific links in specific articles could work, but a generic link is useless). Since then, after much discussion, and a clear consensus (basically everybody but him) that the content nor the link was encyclopedic, he has gone on ramblings that have nothing to do with Wikipedia, but the importance of YouTube content. Many people have indicated to him that Wikipedia is not a forum, but his posts have gone to the point of being vandalism, in my mind. He has even posted the same unencyclopedic content on other pages multiple times for which he has quickly been reverted.

I think he believes that the Wikipedia page about the Baha'i Faith serves as a promotional tool for the religion, and we have indicated to him many many times that it doesn't and that his belief that YouTube is important to the Baha'i Faith is original research and needs some sources. We have even told him that if he likes the media so much, Wikipedia (and commons) has places were GFDL media can be uploaded, but he's stuck on including geneneric YouTube content.

I was wondering if you could take a look; I know it's long, and most of it is very hard to follow, but I don't know what else to do. His ramblings could just continue in the months ahead. Thanks. -- Jeff3000 21:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I think so; he stopped going on these long diatribes. Thanks. -- Jeff3000 17:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

User:BADMINton

Hi JKelly. I've indefinitely blocked User:BADMINton. Wanted to let you know as a courtesy as you recently blocked and unblocked him. Some relevant discussion is at WP:ANI#User:BADMINton. Best regards -- Samir धर्म 04:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome, JKelly! I've checked out the tutorials and am enjoying participating in the Wikipedia community! jszack 12:31, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Image/printable version question

Hi, JK ... I asked this question at the Village Pump Technical section, but I'm not sure how responsive that forum is. Do you know of anyone who might be able to help me figure out this problem? I need to locate someone who understands the technical stuff, and what is causing the problem with the image/printable version combo. Thanks! Sandy 22:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, JK ... it's weird that all the rest print correctly. Maybe I shouldn't worry about it. Sandy 16:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Could use your help

Kelly, I know you are more concerned with images (me too), but my Floyd Abrams articles have been nominated for deletion. I explain the point behind them on the deletion page, but if you think this is important information I could sure use someone backing me up. I have spent so many countless hours working on it, that if it's deleted I'll have to taken an extended vacation from contributing, because I think it is very important. I'm all for deleting useless and vanity-fuelled articles, but this man is living history, and I took it upon myself to do this (after I read the book he gave me when I went to take his photograph for Wikipedia). I am writing a grant-proposal around the project; if it's deleted, well, that would hurt me a lot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Floyd_Abrams_and_the_Pentagon_Papers_case --DavidShankBone 03:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

John Smoke Johnson

THANK YOU for making a silk purse out of the sow's ear of a stub I originally wrote. My illness has prevented me from reviseing it and many other articles. Not that I am complaining when I see such a competent job done. More power to ye! Fergananim 13:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Well

Well, J, I'm glad to see such images up and running, because I've being sujprised that there was'nt more on these areas on wiki. Does anyone know much about the Johnson family of the present day? Surely Sir William, Smoke and the others have present day descendeants? By the way, if you hav not read O' Toole's book yet, do so, as its well worth it. Fergananim 16:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Thuja sutchuenensis photo

Hi Jkelly - this photo does meet the requirements of the WP:FUC. How should they be added? - MPF 10:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks; I'll do that. It is impossible to get a free use photo of the species, none exist (the one I had uploaded is the only photo in existence of the living plant; the species is not in cultivation anywhere as the Chinese authorities have not allowed export of seeds since it was rediscovered in 1999). - MPF 16:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Done; can you let me know if it needs anything more - MPF 22:59, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I won't stand for this

(prevent unfree image from rendering in userspace per WP:FUC -- sorry to intrude, thanks for understanding)

This image is from a website belonging to the Canadian government! The national archives! Leave me the fuck alone, man! NeoThe1 12:16, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Please remember WP:CIVIL. And in case there's any doubt(!), that's intended for NeoThe1, not for JKelly. AnnH ♫ 23:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Hitler

Hi, I haven't involved myself much in image copyright disputes so far, so I don't have your background knowledge or experience. If you're online, could you just check that I'm doing the right thing at Adolf Hitler. Thanks. AnnH ♫ 23:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Note

A request was made on WP:CVU relating to Wikipedia:Vandalism. I have protected the latter page in an earlier version to ward off a revert war; since you edited it recently, please take a look at the current situation. Thank you. >Radiant< 00:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I have objected to: the edit starting the war, to the edit war itself and to the block. See my comments [here].--Blue Tie 04:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

PD-USSR

Could you maybe keep an eye on this? I'll be away for some time, and anyway, if I were to deprecate this tag, some people would go completely nuts. I have produced a proposal for a deprecated version (here, in the history of PD-USSR). I have also imported {{PD-Russia}} from the commons. I do believe PD-USSR should be deprecated prontissimo, otherwise we risk getting an influx of misguided copies from the commons. (P.S.: also see User:Lupo/Notes, where Physchim62 and me are trying to figure out what to do exactly with works published in the USSR outside of the RSFSR. Maybe we should just apply 70years p.m.a. to such works...) Lupo 07:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome

) --EngineerScotty 17:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:USA-E-Supreme-p176a.jpg

Image:USA-E-Supreme-p176a.jpg is based on a picture which resently has been deleted as a copyright violation, especially as the copyrightholder has asked that his pictures where not to be used. The fact that the picture in question was used in a 1954 publication which is now shown on ibiblio makes some people believe it is PD. see [[18]] for further writeup and links to deletions of even other versions of that picture. Agathoclea 17:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - that picture started to become a nightmare with its constant deletions and recreations. Agathoclea 17:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Could you take a further look at Vozas (talk · contribs) uploads. There is a large amount of clearly mislabeled licences (Actors as historical political posters). I have already reverted a number of articles s/he replaced a freeuse image with a fairuse, and have attempted to fix some of the sources but it is just too many for me, and not being an admin I don't have the power really to stopp the user from what he is doing.

Does ****** (pornographic actor) edit Wikipedia as Jkelly?

Surely Not! I always pictured you as a nice woman! Yours in jest, Fergananim 21:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Does ***** (pornographic actor) edit Wikipedia as Jkelly?

Surely not! I always thought you were a girl! Yours in jest, Fergananim 21:28, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Garbo image

Hi. I don't have access to a copy of the issue I scanned that from at the moment, but should be able to again next month, and can add a more detailed description then. (I didn't include such when I uploaded it as that wasn't common practice 3 years ago-- I'm glad we're getting more precise about details of sources.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation 00:00, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Use of logos in Betelgeuse incident

Hello, Jkelly. I am currently involved in a dispute with two editors about the use of the Gulf Oil logo in the Betelgeuse incident article. It seems to me that this logo does not significantly contribute to the article, and thus fails the eighth point of the Wikipedia fair-use policy. The Total logo has just recently been added to the article, and though I haven't yet said anything about it, I think this image also adds nothing significant. I would appreciate your opinion on the matter; the discussion is ongoing at Image talk:Gulf.png. Thank you for your time. —Bkell (talk) 17:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Ready for your turn in the barrel?

We're looking for more OTRS volunteers who would be willing to answer the Foundation's email. Your name came up as being an experienced, trustworthy person who stays cool and who might be able to cope long enough to serve out a 90 day rotation in the quicksand-bottomed, alligator-infested swamps of OTRS. We offer a barnstar to those who have successfully completed a rotation, though this will not make up for the psychic scars or the loss of political capital. Are you willing? The Uninvited Co., Inc. 22:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Help with Image licencing

Hi Jkelly, I was wondering if is possible for a copyright holder to allow reproduction of an image on wikipedia without releasing any rights, ie that it could not be used on any other website. If this is possible, is there a procedure for contacting the copyright holder and requesting use. thanks 213.105.178.25 19:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi. We don't want that kind of licensing arrangement at all. Wikipedia is a project to build a free, reusable encyclopedia. We want material that can be used by anyone for any purpose one might imagine. You can find example requests for media with appropriate licensing at Wikipedia:Boilerplate requests for permission. Jkelly 20:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, makes sense. Just have to find a similar 'free' one so, i suppose. 213.105.178.25 20:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to ask for help finding a suitable image. Many experienced Wikipedians know of a lot of non-obvious places to find freely-licensed or public domain media. Jkelly 20:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks: am looking to reproduce an image taken 30 yrs ago to publicize an ablum release. It was also used as a limited edition free print given away during a reissue of the album a few yrs back. Could this covered by fair use?

Anyway, sorry about the ip thing, typing this at work... 213.105.178.25 21:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. If we really need to republish it (rather than link to it), it may well be something that would meet Wikipedia:Fair use. Take a look at the Wikipedia:Fair use criteria before uploading to make sure. Jkelly 21:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

New User

Hi. I just got a message from a new user (see my talk page) who wants to know "now what?" Can you give him some assistance? I'm not confident enough to know where/how to guide him

Thanks,

Septegram 18:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello. Wrote my first article? Worried about layout, etc. How to improve? AndrewChristian 14:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Curiosity with Image:Tagore3.jpg

Image:Tagore3.jpg was used as the lead image in Rabindranath Tagore. I know it was there when I last edited that article on Sept. 19, and I'm fairly sure I've checked the article since then too. The image is now gone; I don't recall any notice of pending deletion and couldn't find a recent record on WP:IFD. (An image by that name was deleted in 8 May 2006.) Without a record I'm not sure I could even ask at WP:DRV. I really don't know where else to look on WP to find out what happened to it. You seem to be the image specialist - could you check when you have a chance? Gimmetrow 21:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I guess that explains it. Is it customary, when commons images are up for deletion, that no notice is given to articles on other wikis that use the image? Seems like this could have been less abrupt. Gimmetrow 00:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Extirpation

You have recently changed Extirpation to a redirect to extinction. I am aware that it was merely a dicdef at the moment but shouldn't it be left as a stub until it can be expanded instead of redirecting? I know that the extinction article covers extirpation since it is a localized extinction but I would argue in that having the Extirpation article does no harm. Joelito (talk) 03:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Laika

Jkelly, can you please have a look at the Laika FARC, and let us know if there's anyway to save that image? User:Yomangani has made a great effort to save this article from FARC. Sandy 15:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Licenses

Thanks for doing something about that PD-USSR tag. Seems it is deprecated now—looks like someone other than me speaking up got that part of the job (finally!) done. (I hope re-sorting will now be peanuts compared to getting that tag deprecated, even if it will take some time.) Getting Carnildo to set up OrphanBot to deal with new uploads under this tag (also the redirects PD-Soviet and Sovietpd?) was a really good idea. Could we now also remove PD-Soviet from MediaWiki:Licenses? It makes no sense to keep a deprecated tag in the drop-down list of the upload screen... Lupo 08:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Didn't touch

Erm, I didn't touch the Kelly page, or "The Pillows", whatever that is. Que es tu problema? .... Comment added at (15:50, 5 October 2006 by 63.87.123.73

Your history of contributions shows that you or somebody using your IP number did exactly that. You may wish to get and use a username. -- Hoary 16:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Zaparojdik

Hi, I see you've been "scolding" User:Zaparojdik over various image uploads. He's been blocked for the next few days (until the 15th [19]), so don't think he's ignoring you if you don't get an immediate response.--Tekleni 16:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Time for an application of that strange flying thing?

At it again: see this and this and this. How tedious. How about a touch more of this? -- Hoary 13:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Linking Weirdness

Hi. You were foolish kind enough to greet me when I first arrived at Wikipedia, so you now get to be the person to whom I go first for general questions. At Yellowikis there's a link to entitled "Yell" which points to a page with the heading Yell Group, but that page seems to be a complete copy of the page for Reading in the UK.
Any thoughts?
Septegram 22:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. That was a weird one, and I didn't know what to do about it.

Septegram 22:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Stewart Farrar

Excellent job in coming up with those references and in what you've done to the article in general. Wow!

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		for excellent work in research and provision of original sources in a significant number of articles. Excellent work! - Alison✍ 17:25, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sakartvelolamazo.jpg

This file belongs to me personally, do I still have to specify a source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sosomk (talk • contribs)

• I believe so, even if you took it yourself - Alison^✍ 20:25, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I did not,but the authors are cool with me using them under free usage, I am not using them for comercial purposes. Sosomk 21:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Please help, i am don't have that much knowledge about the tags. Can you advise me? In addition, can you help me with Image:Bush-cowboy.jpg? thanks Sosomk 03:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

• I'm guessing you need {{withPermission}} as you have permission of the owner. You've already got {{fairUseIn}} which is probably right but maybe not for user page space. I'll add the permission tag. - Alison^✍ 04:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

• Ah - I see. Jkelly suggests the collage needs each of the images validated first and that fair use may not apply to userpages as it's not illustrating an article. S/he may be right - Alison^✍ 04:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, i get it, please help me with [Image:Okruashvili t250w.jpg] if you find time for it. What type of rationale do i need for this? Sosomk 18:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your cordiality.

We may be on opposite sides in this war, but I appreciate the fact that you addressed me with manners and civility. Those are rare traits in Wikipedians - thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.24.231.159 (talk • contribs)

Re-evaluation co-counseling edit war

Hello J Kelly. Would you be so kind as to give me a perspective on whether the link to a website that publishes articles on re-evaluation co-counseling should be removed or not. The user Mark Thomas has consistently deleted the link whenever anyone has posted it. I think that this is due to his being a member of the organisation and being intolerant of criticism rather than for any of the reasons that he has offered which have looked rather spurious to me :see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Re-evaluation_Counseling Thanks JBennett 11:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC) J Bennett.

Sorry, the webpage is down at the momement due to being moved to a new host. I will let you know when it is back. In the meantime I will have to suffer the slightly abusive rants of Mr Thomas. JBennett 13:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

King Crimson

Please explain to me how using illustrative pictures of their album covers does not constitute fair use - especially when virtually every discography page or section on Wikipedia includes album covers, not to mention the album articles themselves... Leopold Bloom 23:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Muchas gracias

Hey Jkelly, thanks a lot for supporting me in my recent RfA. It succeeded, and I am very grateful to all of you. If you ever need help with anything, please don't hesitate to ask. Also, feel free point out any mistakes I make! Thanks again, —Khoikhoi 04:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Help on images

Hey fellow wikiuser, I was told that you could help me out with pictures. I tend to focus on contributing to Armenian related articles mostly, and I possess an Armenian history book from where i`d like to upload useful pictures. I`m kinda clueless about how the picture system works. Could you please help me out. Appreciated :) Fedayee 03:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Request for help

Greetings. I feel like I'm in the middle of this, and I'm over my head. See User talk:Quadell#Image talk:Bldgoval.jpg, Image:Bldgoval.jpg, and Image talk:Bldgoval.jpg. I saw the image was listed as "replaceable fair use", and saw that someone had disputed that, so I went to investigate. I thought the {{permission}} tag was incorrect, and removed it. Now I'm not sure which way is up. Could you help? Thanks, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:03, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Image Dispute

This same user has been logging on for about a month making wholesale changes without discussion. Considering my extensive attempts in the past to be civil and open to discussion with him just ignoring it, I think I am justified in suspecting he will suddenly change his tune. Thank you for your concern, but you should go through the history of the debate before lecturing me on WP:BITE. JHMM13 (T | C) 17:16, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, ok. So that's what I'm doing. Venting personal frustrations. That's all that a mountain of evidence is. It has nothing to do with the fact that he can't back up his claims, continues to vandalize the Wake Forest University page, refuses for months to engage in discussion, and then the moment he does, chastises me for questioning his motives. I wish I could explain to you how infuriating it is to put forth an honest effort for months and be blamed for being a troublemaker. If you want to deal with this person, fine, I'm out. You are after all the heroic, unbiased bystander with no eye for the past. Unless you have a formal complaint against me, please do not ever contact me again. JHMM13 (T | C) 21:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Those darn images

Hi, Jk. A question about images has been raised at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tourette syndrome: at the request of one editor, I included an image which really adds little, and would rather include the image used at Adderall, but I'm not clear what the licensing tag on that image means. Can you help? Thanks, Sandy (Talk) 14:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks ! Sandy (Talk) 16:39, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

JKelly, I'm sorry to trouble you again - the images in the TS article continue to be far more problematic than the darn text. Would you mind taking a look at this? It's still Greek to me. Thanks in advance, Sandy (Talk) 17:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:AmbassadorTheater(St. Louis).jpg

I just deleted this photograph that you tagged as public domain as a copyvio. Looking at this talk page, it is clear that you are engaged in repeated violations of our Wikipedia:Image use policy. This is a last warning. Don't upload any more images until you have a thorough understanding of our license and copyright rules. Any more potential copyright infringement will result in this account being blocked. Jkelly 20:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Warning noted; actually this is the reason why I have stopped uploading pictures in the past few weeks since I have not understood Wiki's copyright infringements and a lot of them have been deleted. Is this warning in regards to any of the older uploads that might come up down the line or is it just for any new ones that might occure dated 10/27/06? Granded I will not be uploading any more which have copyright infringements but I just want to understand the warning is not for any of the old ones. Regards. Mallaccaos 27 October 2006

Great, I will JKelly. Thanks for the offer. Mallaccaos 27 October 2006

Fair use images in lists

Hello, I see you have contributed your thoughts to Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists. It's been dead for a while, but I have archived it and taken a new fresh start. I hope this time we will be able to achieve something as I have summarized the main points of both sides (feel free to improve them) and I call you to express your support or oppose on the concrete proposal that I have formulated. Thanks, Renata 02:14, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Question about an image

Hey Jkelly, under what tag do you think I'd be able upload this image (the 2nd one) with? Do you think I could safely say the image is PD? Also, could I do something similar to this? Thanks in advance, Khoikhoi 23:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Alright, thanks a lot. BTW, I think it's time to archive your talk page. :-) Khoikhoi 05:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)