This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Welcome!
Hello, Ilse@/archive, 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 need help, check out
Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --
Flockmeal 03:27, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)
Hoi. Ik zie dat je een plaatje van Rotterdam heb geupload. Hopelijk volgen er nog veel meer. Als je iets wil weten, geef maar een gil. Mgm| (talk) 01:12, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you listed Age of Reason for deletion. I checked the history of the article, and it appears to have been blanked by an anon. Make sure in the future to check the history of blank articles, it may have been erased as an act of vandalism. I undid the blanking, so it should be ok. In light of this, I'm requesting that the Afd be withdrawn.
On a different note, in cases of an obvious deletion (i.e. blank articles, like this one) you can list it as a speedy deletion, as it falls under the criteria within Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. You don't need to list the page on Afd or anything. The page is simply listed in a backlog constantly reviewed by administrators, so it should be deleted within a few minutes.
If you do have to list a page for deletion on Afd, it's best to create a new page for the article's listing instead of adding it to another article's, as you added Age of reason's Afd to the page for Confusion the Waitress.
It's not much of a big deal, these things happen often, so tell me if you have any more questions or comments.-- The ikiroid ( talk· desk· Advise me) 23:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
You have previously edited an article about Anne Frank - I wonder whether you would be interested in passing comment on this AfD:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anne_Frank%27s_cats Robertsteadman 09:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Give it a cast section and then you can make it Start. It's definately not B though. Cbrown1023 18:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I understand that there is no agreed structure to the infobox and thought it would be best to put them in order of the credits which would put Ronny Cox bottom as it is difficult to figure out who is the third major character (him, Sharon Stone or Michael Ironside) and as the credits had him listed as 'and' I thought it would be best to put this in the box. If you think this is incorrect then feel free to revert. ( Quentin X 16:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC))
Hi, I notice you've created a number of stub articles recently. It'd be helpful if you could use specific stub categories for these articles, such as {{ NorthHolland-geo-stub}}. A full list of stub categories can be found here. Jeodesic 22:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ruud lubbers.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Oden 11:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I saw you changed the way of sorting in categories of the Dutch actors and actresses. Please take into account that when sorting Dutch names by surname, the so-called tussenvoegsels like de, van der, ter, etcetera are being ignored. I therefore had to revert your changes. Regards, Tubantia 19:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Had never clicked on my talk page link before today, hence I just noticed your left a message ten weeks ago. For what it is worth, my apologies for this late reply. Fixings 17:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Why do you move stub templates? - Ilse @ 22:06, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Saw the comments. Will attempt to make corrections. -- Lenin and McCarthy | ( Complain here) 13:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Ilse@, are you aware of WP:USERNAME#Inappropriate_usernames (usernames containing "@" are no longer allowed)? You may wish to consider changing your username. Regards. — Moondyne 23:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits on Aquinas College, Perth -- much appreciated. But do you know how to fix up the references with no names on them in the reference section - i have all of the info on the talk page to the article if you need it. Thanks =) Smbarnzy 09:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Your welcome!-- Supernumerary 23:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
What do you think would be an appropriate tag for Image:Mount Henry Peninsula.jpg ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Symode09 ( talk • contribs) 20:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC).
Thanks so much for your pointers on the article - they are very much appreciated. I have followed all of what you said it was wonderful - except im not sure about the gallery - i want to keep it - i admit it is a bit cheap and tacky - but it provides other images that the article wouldnt otherwise have and it gives the reader a better insight to the college as a whole. Is there anything i can do to make it better, so we can keep it and be a G/A? thanks Smbarnzy 17:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Ilse@! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but please note that the link you added in is on my spam blacklist and should not be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an Imageshack or Photobucket image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 19:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi there; I posted a reply to your post regarding my signature time substitution at my talk page a while ago, but you probably didn't notice so here's a reminder. Please note that I'm deleting all the comments on my talk page; my reply is located here, or alternatively a link is available at the bottom of my current talk page version.
My apologies if I have bitten here - I'm not feeling to great.
Regards,
Anthonycfc [
T •
C 17:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Wow! You've been busy! I think that there should be a simple bot operated way to solve this, but anyway cudos for spending several hours pressing copy+paste! C mon 21:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Neelie Kroes.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Please do not remove Visual arts banners from articles, as you did with Augustus John. Any other ones I see will just be reverted (if inappropriate). You are not a member of the VA project & I have raised the question on the project talk-page of whether you should be doing VA project assessments. Your editing record suggests little experience of VA articles. You also seem to taking less than 30 seconds to assess an article, which is not long enough to actually read most of them. Johnbod 12:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I want to thank you for all your recent edits and new articles related to Amsterdam. If there's anything I can do to help, drop a note on my talk page. -- User:Krator ( t c) 06:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 22:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
One of the articles that you worked on, Black Book (film), is currently under GA review. I think it just needs the plot to be reworked and copyedited. Please address this so the film can be removed from the GA review. Thanks for your hard work! -- Nehrams2020 05:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
The article Coat of arms of Amsterdam you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Coat of arms of Amsterdam for things needed to be addressed. LordHarris 12:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Found this while looking for references for Amsterdam.
From http://www.bma.amsterdam.nl/adam/uk/intro/gesch1.html
"Relatively speaking, Amsterdam is a late developer. Even though archaeologists recovered Roman coins from the Amsterdam soil, these desolate regions were largely uninhabited during the period we call Classical Antiquity. The first settlers came to Holland in the 9th and 10th centuries, at the time of the first reclamations. We do not know when the first settlers came to the area round the mouth of the river Amstel. Amsterdam’s infancy survives only in legends. One such legend has it that two men and a dog found a dry and fertile piece of land to live on after surviving a shipwreck. 'The legend found its way to Amsterdam's original coat of arms, the koggeschip (cargo ship). Many versions of this coat of arms show two men and a dog."
-- User:Krator ( t c) 18:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I speedy deleted your recent article because it did not provide independent verifiable sources that it meets the notability guidelines. Best to keep on your word processor until it's ready for editing. Jimfbleak. talk. jimfbleak 10:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
-- ALoan (Talk) 13:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 18:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Ilse@,
I have commented on the fair use rationale for the images in the Eurovision article. Thank you for pointing out the fact that the rationales had not been specifically commented. EuroSong talk 18:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Lubbers prodi handshake.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Remember the dot ( talk) 03:26, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed you've been changing the defaultsort of many names with independent prefixes. The Wikipedia:Categorization of people guideline on this was the uninformed edit of a single (Belgian) person hellbend on keeping it that way, presumably because that's how it's done in Belgium. In my hopelessly frustrating discussion on that page he/she was supported once by one other person and no one else got involved. It conflicts with all English language encyclopedias, the Chicago Manual of Style, the Library of Congress authorities recommendation, and the great majority of wikipedia entries (at least before you started reverting things ;-). Sorting or not sorting by the prefixes (usually simply meaning "of") should, according to e.g. the manual of style, be applied according to the country of origin, though emigrees to English speaking countries, including multilingual countries like South Africa and Canada, are usually sorted by prefixes as well. Afasmit 18:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
The sorting of Josquin des Prez as Josquin falls under the exception to the sorting rules that allows Augustine of Hippo to be sorted as Augustine rather than Hippo. Lots of medieval and renaissance names are sorted in this way. You need to know on a case by case basis whether the second name is a description or if it is treated as a surname. In Josquin's case it is treated as a description. (in response to your reply to Afasmit -- there are also exceptions notes to the ordering of names for van, etc; note Beethoven, not van Beethoven). -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 00:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, exactly. With non-modern names, you do not automatically sort them as you would in a modern phone book: Lassus, not De Lassus; Lantins, not De Monte. Then there are yet other exceptions: Jacopo da Bologna is alphabetized under J, not D (or B). Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 01:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I added a fair use rationale and reduced the resolution. Is it ok now?-- KaragouniS 10:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
My pleasure! C mon 09:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I know you couldn't, which is why I didn't complain directly to you. -- Golbez 10:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. I somehow figured that an article name and website URL were enough. – Minh Nguyễn ( talk, contribs) 10:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Eurlings.jpg is copyrighted by the European Parliament [2]. However the EP allows any reproduction when source is acknowledged. [3]. This is fair use, but I cannot find a good alternative template to use. Should one be created for images sourced to the EP? Intangible2.0 12:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Done. It think there wasn't a fair use rationale policy here on August 2006. Machocarioca 07:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)Machocarioca
Thanks for uploading Image:Balkenende de hoop scheffer signing.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Turkish Delight DVD cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 09:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I have added a fair-use rationale for Image:Ciskederat.jpg. Please let me know, if this is not sufficient. Greetings. -- Muziekfan 10:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm a little confused about your message re Image:Arthurqbryan.jpg. It was uploaded nearly two years ago, and at the time, the understand, from what I read and the labels, was that all screenshots (which is what the image was, and is categorized as) were considered fair use. Mind, I'm mostly active on Muppet Wiki now, so maybe I missed some community discussion I'm just confused as to what "rationale" I'm expected to add to that (though there is the further fact that it comes from a public domain film). -- Aleal 23:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Please see now description at Image:Ethelbert.jpg. Thanks, -- Tenebrae 17:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for posting that fair use template. It might come in handy later. I wasn't really sure what to do about it. :) Baseball Bugs 18:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC) (formerly User:Wahkeenah)
Since the logo doesn't qualify fair use when used in other articles, besides the one specifically relating to the French Open, you might need to revert the use of Image:Australian Open.jpg, Image:Wimbledon logo.png and Image:US Open.jpg. I would do it myself, but have to wait 'til morning... -- Dark Falls talk 12:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Could you explain the rationale for removing entire infoboxes from articles simply because they contain fair use images? You do realize you can simply edit the contents of an infobox and remove the image itself, right? - auburnpilot talk 16:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing that Image:ABNtennis.jpg was misisng a fair use rationale. I have added one. When you notice that a fair use rationale is missing, please consider adding the rationale yourself, perhaps based on other fair use rationales that you have seen used on similar images. -- Eastmain 18:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
A "{{
prod}}" template has been added to the article
Azazel (2009 film), suggesting that it be deleted according to the
proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but yours may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --
Rick Block (
talk) 04:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Can you stop removing this image, I created this image and it is not the same as the one used by the party, but one I created for use on another wiki.-- padraig3uk 11:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
For me it is not clear whether the use of their logo is considered to fall under "information". I think you best add this email again to the image description page. – Ilse @ 12:26, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Sinn Féin does claim copyright in the bottom on every page of their website. – Ilse @ 12:28, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Ilse, Thanks for your concern on a Tiny Toons image, and I'll be happy to discuss it with you further on the Tiny Toons Talk page at your earliest convienience. Thanks again, Gak Blimby 21:40, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't think depicting electoral campaigns meets fair use of political posters. I guess one has to assert (rightfully) that these images are used to identify the GreenLeft at different stages of its history to meet fair use. C mon 15:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for asking re: the lead paragraph. I can understand why you deleted the sentence, which seems to belong in the Golden Age article, yet I wonder if the information doesn't furnish a fuller context, a backdrop to his life and work--Rembrandt was pretty much the pinnacle of the Dutch Golden Age. It can work either way. Cheers, JNW 15:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Done. You know it'd be a lot easier for everyone if when you upload a screenshot it gives a automatic detailed rationale by default. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 22:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Wow, User:Ilse@/fairuse is extremely useful! Thanks for making this. I'll be pointing newbies to this when they seem like they don't understand fair-use rationales but would like to. – Quadell ( talk) ( random) 18:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
As the image is not mine, I am not sure as to what else to include in the image description. I can't think of anything to expand on from what is already written there and I don't know how the uploaders computer is set up. -- Lakeyboy 10:09, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
The X in the American manual alphabet does not move, but it does in LSF (French Sign Language). Cwterp 21:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I shrinked'ed it. If you still feel it's not sufficiently low res, can you give a pixel number or something that'd satisfy you? Cheers, Wily D 16:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
If you wish to notify every editor on Wikipedia of this FAR, go ahead, I don't mind. It's just you're contacting people who probably don't remember dealing with the article nor care and will probably be irritated to have a note drop on their page. Certainly when I get notices about articles I have interacted with once in a minor way I find it more annoying than a good opportunity to do some more work. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
why don't you put the rationale info yourself instead of tagging these files? you came here two weeks or something ago and your work is not constructive nor significant and seems like vandalism like if you were hoping that no rationale is added so the picture is deleted. i noticed your contributions consist of adding warning tag, what's your point? is it for revenge maybe? i noticed the fist message you received on your talk page was a tag warning. why don't you help people instead of posting tags? why are there no such rationale on Star Wars' pictures for example? it's like your are focused on Blade Runner, what for? Cliché Online 09:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I added a rationale to Image:Prince PurpleRainMovie.jpg. Please remove the tag if possible. Johnnyfog 15:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. What is a fair use rational? What do you mean by that? Chaldean 22:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I must have mis-read it. It was late and I was tired, so yea. Sorry. Bsroiaadn Talk 20:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Rotterdamochtendmist.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pepsidrinka 19:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
The guideline for sorting surnames with independent prefixes has been changed, without me getting involved in fact. The current rule, a rule of thumb to sort by the first capital, got some approval by a few other wikipedians and can be considered a consensus (much more so than the original rule at least). The resulting order is also very close to that followed by other encyclopedias, libraries and standard style guides, which basically try to follow the "local" rules. Thus, Dutch people are not sorted by the prefixes in their surnames. Perhaps you could now consider reverting your many defaultsort edits of May 24/25? Thanks Afasmit 22:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm writing to you in English because I'm not 100% sure that you're Dutch. Could you add your opinion to Talk:Noorderkerk regarding the renaming of the names of the churches in Amsterdam to English-language equivalents? Regards, Jvhertum 15:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
FYI, Netherlands is currently nominated for the Article Collaboration and Improvement_Drive... you might want to contribute if it gets nominated. JACO PLANE • 2007-08-17 14:29
Hey, I added a few quick comments to Golden Film. Would you have a look at the article of Peter Canavan and tell me what you think. He is a player in Gaelic football, an Irish sport that is not well known outside Ireland. I need the perspective of someone from outside Ireland to let me know if it is confusing to someone who has no frame of reference of the subject. It is an FAC, and the comments page is here. -- Macca7174 talk 13:48, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, do you know which professional databases hosts this newspaper? Thanks -- 172.178.147.37 14:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you cropped an image that I uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, Image:Jan Pronk.jpg. It's better to upload public domain images to commons instead of Wikiepdia so that they can be used in all different language versions of Wikipedia. Cheers, JACO PLANE • 2007-08-20 17:03
Thanks! The article has improved a lot, since you started focusing on it three days ago. What's your intention with the article? Want to try to get it peer reviewed, after additional references and photo's have been added and may be even featured? C mon 10:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Brokeback Mountain was distributed by Focus Features, which is a division of Universal Studios. So Universal would hold the copyright to the image. I prefer faults on front page articles to be fixed and up to scratch and soon as possible! :) Spellcast 13:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
We have added the following to our wikipedia directory as per suggestions
http://www.personalityphotos.com/wikipedia/license.html
PersonalityPhotos 05:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
I found another picture of him from the website of the govenrment archives but I don't know how to licence it. Please help. Deliogul 09:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know, best -- Kudret abi 22:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
The use in the Elvis Presley article and others are illustrative of the subject (postage stamp) they pertain to. It would help editors and Wikipedians if you addressed your deletion tags on the talk page, so they know whats going on and have reasonable time to address the matter. Thanks. -- Northmeister 03:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC) -Amended: Hi, again. Per you 'need help' - Any help would be possible. My concern is yours - making sure the photos are up to par and used rightly. Your guidance would be welcome. -- Northmeister 03:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Non-Free image removal. Thanks for the letting me know and the removal. Keep up the good work. -- Northmeister 21:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Would you stop by Elvis Presley and check out all the photos a second time. We're trying to prepare the article for featured status and considering you interest in photos I would like to know of any problems that might still exist. Thanks. -- Northmeister 03:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
It was uploaded before the decision to remove the seasons 1 and 2 DVDs, and I only did so because the Season 3 DVD image being used was an out-of-date " Prison Mike" version. I have no problem with the deletion. -- Viewdrix 00:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
If you view the talk page, Realist2 (the user who deleted the image - I saw you comment on his talk page because I left him a comment there recently and because I have had a few arguments wih him now) had started and been involved in a debate on the mugshot. Just don't try to reason with the guy...he's a Michael Jackson fan with a view to Wikipedia being somewhat favourable towards Jackson...he's frequently come into conflict with people over his overly-biased (in a positive way) views. But many people get abusive so he doesn't respect us disagreeing. Just a little heads up I guess...give up already. He hasn't actually replied to my last message to him since it so convincingly crushed his opinion. ( The Elfoid 00:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC))
Instead of putting it up for deletion and ignoring my response and my attempt to discuss your concerns, you might have continued the discussion you initiated on my talk page. This is really not appropriate. Gamaliel ( Angry Mastodon! Run!) 22:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
The table is much improved, I might have more suggestions on it after I think on it awhile. I'm still having a problem with:
It is an interesting topic, something I had never heard about, what makes it interesting for me is the criticism of it. The article just needs some work, more than just a few edits. Take a step back, compare with some current FAs, get some more research, and ask for suggestions. When you do get suggestions, think about why the reviewer suggested it, because there probably was a good reason. No reviewer will find every major problem either, though most of them are now listed on the article's FA candidacy page. Don't worry if the nom doesn't pass this time around, because wikipedia has no deadline, and we're not in a hurry. Please let me know if you still have questions, I'll be back later today. Jeff Dahl ( Talk • contribs) 19:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments in the peer review. All the corrections have been made. The peer review has been archived. Please advise in the Talk:Devi_Mahatmya or FAC. -- Sankarrukku 03:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I did not archive it. It was done by SandyGeorgia. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Devi_Mahatmya&action=history -- Sankarrukku 09:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for your comments at the peer review. Sorry that your comments weren't dealt with adequately there, I failed to archive the PR quick enough - the FLC had started already and I was a fool. However, I'd be glad to receive your further comments, suggestions or (dare I) support at the FLC. Cheers! The Rambling Man 17:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
You should have opposed it then and then I would have had no choice but to wait a few days. I didn't take your comments to be anything worth failing the list over, and I felt that they had been addressed. I suggest taking your comments up with the articles nominator, and if they aren't properly addressed in a week or so, then you should nominate it for FLR. -- Scorpion 0422 21:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
It's usually best to have only link to the same name in an article, so that's why I did not link the names in the image captions because they had already been linked elsewhere. Nishkid64 ( talk) 01:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
You have nominated a recent WP:FLC. There have been two recent proposals to begin a List of the Day feature on the main page, which have both received majorities but have not been approved as overwhelming support sufficient for the main page. WP:LOTDP is a new proposal to try to get the ball rolling based on the original proposal. Voice your thoughts on its talk page.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I removed those succession boxes since they're redundant once you add succession templates like {{ Feyenoord managers}}. The consensus on WP:FOOTY seems to be not to include both. Cheers, JACO PLANE • 2007-11-9 21:05
I will work on the issues you brought up. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Ilse@, I removed this from FAR per the minimum time between mainpage and review as explained in the instructions at WP:FAR; if issues aren't resolved, you can re-approach FAR after the specified time. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 07:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
You are the nominator of a WP:FL that was promoted in the last month. I am inviting you to participate in nominations and voting in a List of the Day experiment I am conducting at WP:LOTD.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTD) 00:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
All is done except the caption. Please review if its fine and crash out the request. Also, the other screeshot, I think it would be detrimental to remove because it further depicts the nature of the music video (e.g. the two roles used in the video, brunette and blonde Spears). If its not ok, please tell me. -- βritandβeyonce ( talk• contribs) 03:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I wonder if you can explain your reasoning behind switching the color painting at the top of Honoré de Balzac to the black-and-white daguerrotype. I believe that the color image is much more inviting to the reader, and I'd like to switch it back – but I'd rather not do so unilaterally without discussing it first. Cheers. – Scartol • Tok 13:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
It seems I'm the first one there: do I vote on the userpage or on the discussion page? Shouldn't there be two headings:
and
??? Thank you - Happy New Year - Shir-El too 20:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
I've replied to your message and would like to know what else needs doing. It would be great to turn your Comment into Support :) -- ROGER DAVIES talk 11:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Good afternoon. I noticed that you removed an image from Barack Obama, citing a lack of a proper fair use rationale. I had a look at the image, and corrected the error. The image now has rationales for both articles in which it appears. On that basis, I re-added it to the article - but, by all means, if there's any additional steps I need to take to correct any existing problems, please let me know. Thanks! UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ilse@,
No worries. No, you don't need to worry about archiving the PPR noms. Every week or so either myself or one of the other regular editors there goes through and archives the older noms to keep the page from getting cluttered up. I also leave a note on anything that's actually gone through for a nomination at FPC, and usually archive those, even if they aren't so old, although I tend to be the only one that does that (I just find it more 'complete' to do so). Looks like the nom's going pretty well. Cheers, -- jjron ( talk) 10:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:Queen Wilhelmina & Juliana.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
jjron (
talk) 08:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Hallo,
Your Stroopwafel article is good, but I don't like the reference to stroopwafelshop.com. I feel it is a commercial link. I don't know if you put it in ? Stroopwafelshop.com has stolen / plagiarized text from our website to their's. Calculated bunch of people. I hope you are not directly involved with them. Our website is www.caramelcookiewaffles.com. Feel free to check.
Jan Boogman user Jwboogman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwboogman ( talk • contribs) 20:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
My point was that stroopwafelshop.com on their history/recipe page plagiarized text from our website www.caramelcookiewaffles.com. This is the plagiariazed text: " These delicious Caramel Cookie Waffles (called Stroopwafels by the Dutch) with richly filled chewy centers are one of Holland's true specialties. ..." ( on our website since 1998 ! )I have asked them to change the phrase, but to no avail. I don't think they are a reliable reference source. They pick up any information so they can achieve a high ranking in Google search for stroopwafels. What they have published on their website should be referenced with real historical data, such as old city publications, News Papers, and documents from the few remaining old bakeries in Gouda. Asking those stroopwafel bakeries probably would give you a start. The stroopwafel information that I have is unfortunately also all from hearsay, and is not referenced. Given these facts I don't think Stroopwafelshop.com should have a link pointing them. They are a commercial link, not a reliable reference source.One could ask Stroopwafelshop.com where they got there information.
My compliments to you for writing a good and informative story about stroopwafels. It is a tremendous improvement over an earlier version ! I just had to get this off my chest. Thanks for your good work, Jan Willem Boogman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwboogman ( talk • contribs) 22:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
for every external link. –
Ilse
@ 13:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Hello, I've just reviewed your FAC for Golden Film and while I can't support right now I've added a lot of comments to help you improve the article to the minimum standard which I would expect for FA. All the best, The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello! During a peer review not so long ago, you had copy edited the article on Rufus Wilmot Griswold. I've since expanded it (specifically, a section on his literary reputation and influence). If you get a moment, could you give it a once-over? I'm hoping to nominate it for Good Article in a few days. -- Midnightdreary ( talk) 15:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey Ilse@, responses to your questions below... (my up to date comments in italics)
Already promoted. I retain my support for the promoted version (but agree that the small version is a disaster, and any reasons for wanting it in the Shakespeare article by those editors seems bizarre and totally self-serving, and I would oppose that too as you suggested). -- jjron ( talk) 05:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Image:Prinsengracht Amsterdam.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Image:Prinsengracht Amsterdam.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Image:Prinsengracht Amsterdam.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click
here
CSDWarnBot (
talk) 09:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:Poster Het woeden der gehele wereld.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 16:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, I did oppose that one too, as Painting is not that helpful a link, but I'm happy to leave things as they are. Johnbod ( talk) 22:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
The article Bathsheba at Her Bath has been improved since you nominated it for deletion. You might want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bathsheba at Her Bath. -- Eastmain ( talk) 18:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Similarly, you may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syndics of the Drapers' Guild in light of the improvements that have been made to Syndics of the Drapers' Guild. == Eastmain ( talk) 18:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
-- BorgQueen ( talk) 08:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ilse,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Queen Wilhelmina & Juliana.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 26, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-05-26. howcheng { chat} 00:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
'n Beetje Verliefd, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? βcommand 02:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BNN logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cyzor ( talk) 13:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello Ilse, The table should be under government as you said. But the table is not incomplete. It is actually very complete and a source confirmes this. Also, in my opinion it should be in the article since every article concerning a city has one. Indien je Nederlands bent, kan je me voortaan berichtjes in het Nederlands sturen. Bedankt voor het berichtje. Massimo Catarinella ( talk) 19:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 07:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps under which terms the article was delisted following a seven day waiting period. There is absolutely no requirement to notify wikiprojects or users of the intention to delist and users involved should have noticed this come up on their watchlists when the concerns were first raised. If you feel strongly about it I suggest you address the list of problems on the talk page and then renominate it at WP:GAN. If you feel really strongly about the manner in which it was delisted, take it to WP:GAR for a second opinion. Regards-- Jackyd101 ( talk) 12:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I found it odd that you stated "replace non-free book cover (reasons: image not significant for this article; no purpose of use description in fair use rationale other that "used to illustrate") in the summary of the FairTax article, when our fair-use policy states "It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of book covers to illustrate an article discussing the book in question qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law". The only purpose of the Fair-Use is to "used to illustrate". Then you removed the image from the other articles stating their was "no article rational" after you first removed that rational from the image. All these seem to fall under Fair-Use and the rational for their use was there. You also didn't give any discussion about it. The book was one of the major points in the FairTax movement and is discussed in the lead - it is very significant and the most visible image in relation to the FairTax plan. I haven't reverted your changes but am considering doing so. Morphh (talk) 15:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
-- Gatoclass ( talk) 14:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Apart from the fact that I've just started the article Jan de Baen and it is still rather short, what kind of copyediting does the article need? – Ilse @ 18:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
-- Mifter ( talk) 19:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Het is lang geleden dat ik op school zat dat de juffrouw suggesties deed. Dit is geen schoolklasje. Ga je gang met je suggesties of aanwijzingen. Taksen ( talk) 19:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:KeizersgrachtReguliersgrachtAmsterdam.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
jjron (
talk) 08:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
|
Hallo Ilse, Deze foto is nu een FPC op en.wikipedia.org. -- Massimo Catarinella ( talk) 22:42, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Please do not attempt to edit war on this image. Information has been provided, and if you believe more is required, there is a talk page. Best, - auburnpilot talk 14:10, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm a little confused by this. The picture exists on commons already. We are supposed to delete images on Wikipedia that are already on commons.
I checked the version of the image I deleted and it was tagged with an image to state that it had been specifically downloaded from commons as a copy, so what's the problem with deleting it? Gatoclass ( talk) 13:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Screenshot Hollow Man.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 07:05, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
I'd just like to say a big 'Bedankt!' for that, it looks a lot better now.
EasyTarget ( talk) 09:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)