This 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. This archive page covers comments 2101-2150, from roughly April 23, 2009 to May 11, 2009. |
Ok...now I'm a member :-)
On a semi-related topic, I'm thinking about applying to be an admin. Any feedback prior to submission would be greatly appreciated. — BQZip01 — talk 01:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
I will write the article and upload the photo. which licence should I use? Historic? (Vegavairbob Vegavairbob ( talk) 22:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC))
You probably want to use this:
{{Non-free use rationale | Description = | Source = | Article = | Portion = | Low_resolution = | Purpose = | Replaceability = | other_information = }}
All the best, – Quadell ( talk) 23:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment re List of Grade I listed buildings in North Somerset. I've now nominated List of Grade I listed buildings in West Somerset - if you had any comments that would be great. I'm gradually working my way through all the sub lists at List of Grade I listed buildings in Somerset - but there are lots of red links & other issues so it could keep me going for quite a while.— Rod talk 11:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind help in this matter. I have followed your advice and removed the image from the article. I have replaced it with a link to the source webpage. I'm not sure whether it's permissible to edit its Image:EdwardLabkovsky.jpg page or not (?) so I have not attempted this. By the way, I agree with you about "1948" not matching the photo, and I think the date must be wrong for other reasons too, so have deleted that also. Please let me know if all is well now. Thanks.-- Storye book ( talk) 14:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Thx Quadell. I've just tried to clear the image page, but it removes the tags and not the photo, which makes it worse. I can't find a way to unload the photo from Wiki. So I undid my edit and the page is now as it was. I don't think it's permissible to clear the image page, because removing the tags would just attract more tags and a possible accusation of vandalism. This is a pity, because unloading the image from the server would have put everything right.-- Storye book ( talk) 07:51, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Thx for your kind help, Quadell. It wasn't a very flattering image of the subject, anyway - so it's all for the best. Thanks again. Cheers. -- Storye book ( talk) 16:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
The Articles for Creation Barnstar | ||
For working on the OBI missing biographies list starting in 2005 all the way to completion! Jokestress ( talk) 21:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC) |
Hi Quadell- Is it possible to transfer the text ( subsection) I already added to Chevrolet Vega I plan on adding more too. (Vegavairbob 71.167.64.240 ( talk) 01:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC))
You can delete the image if you wish, it's a photo of a photo. Timeshift ( talk) 02:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I 'm not the one who uploaded the latest photo of mayor Bartolome Ramos of Santa Maria,Bulacan Angeles624
That's what you get when you type things too quickly! Thanks for correcting. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 19:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Thats AT&T Park, and a different file of the image is used in the article. I guess the other one can be deleted? -- Coasttocoast ( talk) 19:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
So while I'm thinking about it, ListasBot 3 is building its list of
old talk pages. What's the criteria for determining that the content is important enough to request a history merge? Scratch that, I
figured it out.
Matt (
talk) 04:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I'm cherry-picking through some of these, starting randomly at page 40 and working on the pages which have missing items (but doing all the rest of the cleanup on those pages, too) and the odd other one which catches my eye (some "only one blue link" pages etc). For Annandale I found an extra addition which your bot hadn't found, probably because it's got an incorrect (I think) two-level geographic disambiguation: Annandale, Pasadena, California. I spotted it because the bot had picked up the local railway, Annandale (Pacific Electric)! I'm not sure whether you'd want the bot to cope with incorrect headings, but thought I'd mention it anyway. Cheers, PamD ( talk) 11:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey they Quadell,
Was wondering your rationale for deletion. The discussion was split 50/50 and the only one who supported was yourself. I'm not saying you are wrong, but I fixed the image's licensing issues; it was ineligible for copyright based upon {{ PD-ineligible}}. In short, the discussion was split, so deleting it based upon those merits seems like an error. Maybe I'm missing something here. Would you object to restoring it and relisting it for further discussion? — BQZip01 — talk 17:22, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Template:GFDL-presumed, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:GFDL-presumed and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:GFDL-presumed during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ? JohnnyMrNinja 18:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
I am curious why you approved a bot that clearly violates current policy? If you disagree with policy, I understand. Then you should try to have the policy changed. I don't think you should have approved the above linked bot request.-- Rockfang ( talk) 21:41, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
The images are available in hundred of articles, forums and blos in the Internet. I have seen pictures of many Models, and actors, like Al Pacino, how where those images uploaded? -- Juliaaltagracia ( talk) 04:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
ohhh the wikipedian photographer knows Al Pacinohow about Miss Puerto Rico Ingrid.JPG I really just want to learn,why some pictures here are tag as own work,when it is obvious that they are not. -- Juliaaltagracia ( talk) 04:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
No sorry I'm not suspiciuous. I meet Al Pacino in DR when he came to film The Godfather. I was staying at the same hotel he was, and he went to pool. But there are hundreds of picture here, from Beauty Pageant, and are copied from the Internet, and the wikipedians just tag them as own work. Well no picture for this article then. thanks anyway -- Juliaaltagracia ( talk) 04:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Quadell,
What do you suggest we do about some of these pages that ListasBot is finding (such as this and this)? Thanks, Matt ( talk) 01:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey Quadell,
Another question for you on ListasBot. I changed ListasBot 2 lastnight, does this require another BRfA (since it should be done as part of setting 'living=yes' or 'activepol=yes' in a WPBio template anyway)? Thanks, Matt ( talk) 19:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
I think that it's dumb to have a photo of a statue removed, but if it in the law then yes it should be removed. The problem that I have is how do we know who has and if there is a it's copyrights? B64 ( talk) 20:55, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Thought I would stop by and formally introduce myself. I am guessing you are a lawyer or interested in legal matters. I too am a lawyer but of the M&A ilk so the copyright/FUR stuff is interesting to get to grips with. See you around. – ukexpat ( talk) 02:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Please undelete this image. -- Cat chi? 05:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I see you've just passed your fifth b-day yourself. Haipa Doragon ( talk • contributions) 14:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Why is it that in this case the subtopic title is not useable while every other is? Weird. Hekerui ( talk) 17:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Could you please take a look at the image 'situation' regarding this page, you changed the image in the infobox to one which is definitely not him. The problem being there are files on both Wikipedia and Commons with the name of File:Briggs.jpg and the Wikipedia one (the incorrect one for this file) takes precedent. I'm no image expert so don't know whether you can bypass the Wikipedia image or whether you need to move the files to a new name, but hopefully you can sort it out. Thanks. -- Jpeeling ( talk) 09:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Seeing that you are an advocate of NPOV, ther is a page that I'd like you to take a look at: Troy Davis case. This article is about a death row inmate seeking appeal. The page has become very sympathetic to his cause and as it is now reads like campaign for his exoneration. I've tried to start solving this myself but I don't really have enough experience to do a major rewrite. I've also gone to the NPOV/Noticeboard but it is backloged. Thank you for your attention. JakeH07 ( talk) 20:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The Bot award | ||
I was looking at WP:BRFA and the table of open bot requests and saw that your name was the latest BAG edit to nearly every one. So thanks for all your work oiling the gears of the system and keeping the process non-stressful and speedy. (And to another 6 (!) years of happy editing!) [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 21:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC) |
Thanks so much! I'm sure Polbot will appreciate the oil. – Quadell ( talk) 12:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, I would have suggested Wikipedia talk:Non-free content or Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), but now I'm sure anymore. The more I read over things the more I think it's not even worth pursuing. There are so many interlinked areas to coordinate, I worry about splintered discussions and keeping up with intricate policy changes. Following the whole thing from beginning to end would take up more time and energy than I have available to be on Wikipedia. I'm no lawyer and most of my dealing with images has been a giant headache; I joined Wikipedia to write articles not deal with policies that aren't adequately defined. I guess forget about it. Thank you for your time. ( Guyinblack25 talk 22:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC))
The Template Barnstar | ||
For this much-appreciated improvement, I hereby award you this barnstar! Great work! – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 02:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC) |
Dear Quadell
The tree is the elm cultivar Ulmus 'Nanguen' better known by its registered tradename of 'LUTECE'. The tree was about 6 years old when photographed, and survives today at Great Fontley, England. Cannot remember the circumstances of its uploading, clearly one of my 'off' days. Regards, Ptelea ( talk) 09:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello Quadell- 71 Chevy Vega Hatchback.jpg 1976 Monza Towne Coupe.jpg 1976 Buick Skyhawk.jpg 1977 Olds Starfire SX.jpg 1978 Olds Firenza.jpg 1978 Pontiac Sunbird Formula.jpg Anetode gave me a final warning and bot removal (Carnildo) removed these deleted PD-pre1978 images. They were deleted for non-proper copyright status. Anetode talk page shows him to be a user. check my talk page for the posted warning. Can this warning be removed and image deletions reversed? Thanks.{Vegavairbob Vegavairbob ( talk) 14:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)}
Wow, I reckon "flawlessly" is probably an exaggeration, but yes, it's hasn't destroyed the wiki yet. Still, nice to get it off the books. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 20:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Its been a good year and i hope the next ones will be to. Cheers Kyle1278 22:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The Helping Hand Barnstar | ||
Quadell-For all that you do and all the valuable information, I hereby award you this barnstar. Thanks for all your help. Vegavairbob ( talk) 02:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC) |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | ||
Quadell-For your knowledge and assistance with copyrights, I hearby award you this barnstar. Your work is greatly appreciated. Vegavairbob ( talk) 02:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC) |
You may have noticed, but with some kind help from friends Docu and MZMcBride, I've been using python more often than AWB these days. I thought I should let you know because you recently approved Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Xenobot 6 for AWB, but I've switched to python using a script written by MZM (code pasted onto the BRFA page). It seems to be working quite well. let me know if the BRFA page needs to be updated at all. (also, is it OK to paste the additional info at the top like that?) cheers, – xeno talk 03:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I also noticed Category:Open Wikipedia bot requests for approval, I believe this needs to be removed from the ones you've approved already, right? (Its new as of late Feb). – xeno talk 03:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
The article looks like a good candidate for DYK, but it is too short right now. The prose portion of the text needs to be at least 50% longer. (I count about 1000 characters now, and the standard minimum for DYK is 1500 characters.) Once it's long enough, write a hook (or two or three) and nominate it... (I might have more to say, but it's bedtime now.) -- Orlady ( talk) 04:45, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to notify you that I have filed a Wikiquette complaint against this user and would like you to take a look at what I've got there. Apparently, this user has a long history of unconstructiveness and aggression towards other editors, especially those who choose to remain anonymous. I would like your honest input on this matter. Thank you very much in advance and I do apologize that your time gets wasted with this kind of bullshit. 87.69.176.81 ( talk) 06:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Quadell.
I've got the cron-job up and running for this task now, and it made about a dozen edits this morning. One thing it is doing, however, is making edits like this one, which obviously is fairly pointless. Any thoughts about how to make it work more usefully?
[[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 07:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi :) I can't delete the image because it's still being used by {{ Mycomorphbox}} and I can't figure out a way to remove that reference. If you can do so, feel free :) -- Luk talk (lucasbfr) 08:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Buddy, should it not References proceed External links?. Cheers!-- Chanaka L ( talk) 14:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Did the fixing. Here we go this is the link for Mos guideline, WP:LAYOUT. Cheers!-- Chanaka L ( talk) 02:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for taking a look at Troy Davis case. I appreciate your commitment to NPOV. I am like you in that i beleive Davis should get a new trial but think that page is very biased. Thank you for your time. JakeH07 ( talk) 21:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi again Quadell. Please could I request assistance on this one? I'm trying to get the copyright question right on USSR photos which have clearly been made before 1951/54. I yesterday uploaded such a photo file:A BorisA Berlin1948.jpg which is rare evidence for important recent research on the subject of the article Alexandrov Ensemble. However it has been tagged on the grounds of the administrator being "not sure" (see Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 May 4). I have responded, giving further information on the image page, and on the discussion page, but have had no response, and no modification to the tag. Please could you kindly give your opinion on this, or modify the tag if appropriate? I am happy to ask for the image to be deleted if it's justified, but at the moment we are in limbo, with a deletion tag on the article page. The exam season at my college starts tomorrow, so from tomorrow until the end of July I shall not be able to monitor these pages daily. Thanks. -- Storye book ( talk) 10:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I thought no one noticed. Where did you find this out? Wow! I'm just too overwhelmed. Thanks, really, thanks a lot. Aditya( talk • contribs) 02:20, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey, Quadell, thanks for the message on my Talk page. This editor has now put a warning on my page and Cunard's re breaking the 3RR, which as far as I can see neither of us have. However, the editor in question has re-added this entry six times and it's back on there now. Can you offer any help with this? The editor has posted about it on the MOS:DAB Talk page and corresponded with 3 editors about it, but isn't backing down. I hate to get embroiled in these things, but I can't let somebody bully their way through this either.
I've edited a bit of your latest batch, but won't do as many as last time because it's hndis pages I focus on. However, I'll keep chipping away at it and mop up the name pages in your next batch. Your bot shows up just how many dabs need work on them! I've got 15,000 of the hndis pages on my watchlist, so at least I'm quite confident about them, but there are many articles which still aren't on them. Oh well, at least I'm not stuck for things to do on here! Thanks again, Boleyn2 ( talk) 18:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Wow, that was quick! Thanks, Boleyn3 ( talk) 18:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Quadell, just a quick note to point out that User:Melchiord is apparently using the User:Gregory Clegg identity to get past your ban per this edit [1]. Cheers, ponyo ( talk) 19:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Gatoclass ( talk) 12:08, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Greetings. I'm not an OTRS user, and I only vaguely understand how the process works. On Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 April 23, IronGargoyle noted that Commons:File:Traditional chinese wedding2.jpg has a permission verified by an OTRS ticket. For reasons I'm unclear on, IG suspects that other images (listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 April 23) might be covered by the same ticket. Can you confirm this? Thanks, – Quadell ( talk) 01:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi! You answered my question about the WWII family-owned photos and if how they can be released for use on WP. You said there is no paperwork involved or anything to have this figure's son release the photos, but how does WP know it has indeed been released under a free license? It just takes my word for it? Is it just a verbal thing/email thing where this man's son tells me, "Yeah, we'll release it under that licence" and I tag the image with it? Or does he need to send an email to WP confirming that he does indeed wish it to be released under that license? Is it really just as simple as I'm reading it to be? Thanks so much for your help!
Oh, also, if the family owns a photo (as in, the rights presumably), but it's been previously published in a book about the WWII figure in question (but never released via a free license thing, only given a credited byline), does it still belong to the family and they can give me permission? Or do I now have to seek it from the book's author/publisher? -- ScreaminEagle ( talk) 22:37, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of WORK [ insert link ].
I agree to publish that work under the CC-BY-SA version 3.0 license. I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. DATE, NAME OF THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER |
I've just finished throwing this together, please evaluate and let me know what you think. I'm concerned that the numbers I came up with don't match what Abraham's book indicates. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey-
I'm just curious about some of the local images that you deleted since they are now available on commons. It looks like a number of recent ones didn't have the full upload history which is needed for GFDL reasons, and one was tagged for deletion on Commons. F8 says that the upload history is needed and image shouldn't be tagged for deletion. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 02:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
My BAG membership nomination passed today at 8/0/0 unanimously. I sincerely thank you for participating in my BAG request. I appreciate all the kind words that I received and will endeavor to justify the trust the WP community has placed in me....Have a nice day. :-) -- Tinu Cherian - 09:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC) |