User talk:Grendelkhan/Archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Contents

About time for you to be nominated for adminship!

BD2412 would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact BD2412 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Grendelkhan/Archive2. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Hi, thanks for accepting the nom - just wanted to point out that you have another question on your RFA page. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

You're a sysop!

Hi, Grendelkhan/Archive2, Congratulations on Becoming a Sysop
Original Barnstar.png

Hey there. I'm pleased to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator! You've volunteered to do housekeeping duties that normal users sadly cannot participate in. Sysops can't do a lot of stuff: They can't delete pages just like that (except patent nonsense like "aojt9085yu8;3ou"), and they can't protect pages in an edit war they are involved in. But they can delete random junk, ban anonymous vandals, delete pages listed on Votes for deletion (provided there's a consensus) for more than one week, protect pages when asked to, and keep the few protected pages that exist on Wikipedia up to date.

Almost anything you can do can be undone, but please take a look at The Administrators' how-to guide and the Administrators' reading list before you get started (although you should have read that during your candidacy ;). Take a look before experimenting with your powers. Also, please add Administrators' noticeboard to your watchlist, as there are always discussions/requests for admins there. If you have any questions drop me a message at My talk page. Have fun! =Nichalp «Talk»=

Please also add your name to WP:LA =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the club, member #11 :). From member #9, NoSeptember 15:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Congratulations on your determination of mop-worthiness... I had (and have) no doubts. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, thank you all. I've added myself to the list, and look forward to helping out. grendel|khan 16:17, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Feedback on Soft focus

I saw your request for comment for soft focus, so I added a bit of feedback on the feedback page. Hope it helps! NigelQuinine Blather• Toil 03:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Kiritimati FP delist nomination

Hi, I have nominated Image:Kiritimati-EO.jpg to be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Kiritimati-EO.jpg delist. --KFP (talk | contribs) 22:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Elfen_Lied_ep4_Nyuu.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Elfen_Lied_ep4_Nyuu.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The source was stated ("Elfen Lied episode 4") both in the title and image description. The U.S. distributor is listed at Elfen Lied, but it's now also listed in the image description. grendel|khan 21:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Released MP3s.

There really isn't any way to prevent loss, which is sad.

If you have only the mp3s to work with, then the best option is to use a good encoder, at high bitrates. But even then, the quality hit is unavoidable. But the regret is relative; the vast majority of users should not be able to tell the difference.

The current Hydrogenaudio recommended encoder is aoTuVr1 (Aoyumi's Tuned Vorbis release 1), a quality-tuned fork of xiph.org's version of Vorbis, widely agreed to significantly increase quality at low-to-medium bitrates, and achieve transparency for most at quality 5. If your KDE screenshot means anything, http://www.geocities.jp/aoyoume/aotuv/source_code/libvorbis-aotuv_r1.tar.bz2 is what you want.

Compile that; decode the mp3s (xmms can decode to file last I remembered), and encode using -q 5 or higher, and see if the filesize is ok. Remember that you can use fractional quality values safely (-q 5.99, -q 6.25) to finely manipulate the size. And above -q 7 is definitely overkill, even for transcoding.

-- Znode (talk) 20:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:T. S. Monk.ColumbiaUniversity.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:T. S. Monk.ColumbiaUniversity.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Rationale added to the image description page. grendel|khan 20:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Library of Congress classifications

Should pages now at titles like Library of Congress Classification:Class P, subclass PB -- Modern languages and Celtic languages and Library of Congress Classification:Class P, subclass PA -- Greek language and literature, which you created long ago, be combined into a single page? —Centrx→talk • 19:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Some of them (like PT are pretty long; the sum total would be very long. However, I didn't write the original articles; I just followed an existing format that someone had written before me. (And this is how standards are born...) Would you still want to concatenate them, even though they're very long? I'd argue for letting inertia work its will here. grendel|khan 23:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

The problem is they're not encyclopedia articles and they're horribly named. I would tend to think they should be deleted if not merged. —Centrx→talk • 03:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the idea was to be able to browse Wikipedia along the LCC categorization lines. See List of Dewey Decimal Classes for a similar project. I do agree that they're badly named; what do you think about "Library of Congress Classification class P, subclass PT"? Or just "Library of Congress Classification subclass PT"? I think that's unique and well-defined. (We can't do "Library of Congress Classification P", because there's both the outer class P and the subclass P, for instance.) grendel|khan 16:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Ah, it was Wikipedia:Contents. Scroll down to see the LCC listed as a way of browsing Wikipedia. grendel|khan 16:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Ah, this is horrible. There's also List of people by name. We need an Index namespace or something. —Centrx→talk • 22:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Faber @ Maryland

he coached both, as was the custom then since most football players played lacrosse in spring to stay in shape. jim brown of syracuse is a famous example. WillC 23:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, cool, so [1] is a source of information. Excellent. grendel|khan 03:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks!

Thanks for making the photo of the flutist available under the GFDL! I've used it in a book at http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/3vw/ch04/ch04.html#Section4.4 . The book is GFDL licensed, and you're credited in the photo credits section.--75.83.140.254 00:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Knight underpromotion example.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Knight underpromotion example.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — MECU≈talk 15:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Rook underpromotion avoiding stalemate.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Rook underpromotion avoiding stalemate.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — MECU≈talk 16:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:BDSM collar back.jpg

Howdy! As a courtesy, I thought I'd notify you that the Featured Picture status of Image:BDSM collar back.jpg, which you created, is currently being reconsidered. Feel free to weigh in at the discussion here, or correct any faults listed therein. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 21:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Maths rating

Thanks for adding {{maths rating}} to so many pages yesterday. However, it would have been even more useful if you had actually evaluated the articles. Anyone can rate articles - see details on the {{maths rating}} page. Also, it is helpful to add the article to the relevant sub-page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Wikipedia 1.0. Tompw (talk) 12:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Will do; I'll get right on that. Thanks! grendel|khan 14:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Snow Curve

Yeh sorry about taking so long i dont use that account anymore its correct thanks for making it an svg i have alot more stuff on snow making if u want it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.189.98.101 (talk)

Sure! I'd especially be interested in where you got the source data for that graph. grendel|khan 14:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

ISFDB live

Hi, just wanted to let you know that the ISFDB is finally live on user editing. I didn't know if you'd visited it in the last two or three weeks, so just a heads up in case you have time to get involved over there. Ciao -- Mike Christie (talk) 01:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the heads-up. This should be interesting. grendel|khan 03:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

PGP GUI images

Thanks for the {{Windows-software-screenshot}} tags for Image:PGPgui1.png et al. I did not know the appropriate copyright tag to use. — Loadmaster 21:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I've done sillier things. grendel|khan 22:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Friendly discussion point - I checked out your user page, and can't help but feel friendly toward a fellow Heinlein fan (I have all of his stuff, and he definitely shaped me growing up, especially Starship Troopers and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress). (Also, Vinge is awesome - and I hope you've checked out John Ringo's stuff.) I was wondering - would you classify Heinlein-style libertarianism as "right-wing"? I sometimes wonder about the POV regarding this on Wikipedia - it seems that often libertarians get unjustly classified as 'conservatives' just because of their perceived alliance with the right wing on the issues of small government/lower taxes. (Just as someone who is anti-Islam also gets lumped in with 'conservatives', regardless of their other views, because the current administration is also perceived as anti-Islam.) RJASE1 02:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I think self-described libertarians get lumped in with conservatives because of this narrative: Glenn Reynolds, Eugene Volokh and so forth have hitched their wagons to Bush, for good or ill, despite running in the opposite direction of their small-government ideal, and despite expansions of state power that would have made Clinton blush. The defining issue of our time is supporting or not supporting the administration; if you support them, you're conservative. Despite the administration having pulled the same snow job on small-government libertarians that they pulled on David Kuo, they're still sniffing his cod. This is the reason given; I'm not saying whether or not I agree with it. Not to even open the whole anti-Islam can of worms... grendel|khan 02:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
You're probably right (and you can include Neal Boortz with Volokh and Instapundit) - I think U.S. libertarians who are politically active have mostly found an ideological home with these guys, as the Libertarian Party is pretty much a joke. Europeans seem to have had a little more luck (parties like the VVD come to mind).
Maybe now that the Democratic Party controls Congress, some of the libertarians will drift here. Probably depends whether the Democrats make any effort to woo them - the Republicans at least talk the talk, even if they rarely walk the walk unless their backs are to the wall.
Have a good one - oh, and I'll have to check out Kings of the High Frontier, looks intriguing. RJASE1 14:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:Kings_of_the_High_Frontier.bookcover.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Kings_of_the_High_Frontier.bookcover.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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. ↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 20:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Odd that we have to essentially duplicate what {{bookcover}} already says. grendel|khan 20:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
My apologies for duplicating the "Missing Fair Use Rationale" tag on your image. It must have been an oversight on my part. Unfortunately, the basic fair use tag (such as {{bookcover}}) is not enough in establishing fair use rationale. Thank you for fixing the issue.↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 20:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Updating a JTable with new information (Java)

Yes, that makes perfect sense. It only took a few changes in the code, but I did manage to get it working. Perhaps not in the most efficient way (using a setDataVector each time the redraw is called), but it does work. My theory for doing it that way is because eventually I'll need to delete individual entries, but I say as long as it works, that is fine by me. I'd like to thank you immensely for your assistance; I'd still be lost if I hadn't known about the DefaultTableModel class. I do hope you have a most wonderful day, and happy editing! Kyra~(talk) 07:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad it worked out for you. I still remember my own frustrating introduction to Swing and the model-view separation, which seemed really elegant once it "popped" for me, and I was enlightened. grendel|khan 07:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Getting {{navbox generic}} to hide by default

Hi. I noticed at Template talk:MediaCompression#Redone with {{navbox generic}} that you wanted to know how to hide stuff by default. What you need to do is add |state=collapsed to your {{navbox generic}} call. Cheers. —davidh.oz.au 04:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

About "Image:1453 conquest.jpg""

This is the second time somebody asks about this picture. This picture contains a "concept" rather than a creation. Mehmed II is entering the last fortress of the Roman world, victorious, and carrying the green flag of Islam (while his Akıncıs -Turcoman soldiers- are carrying the red, actually crimson, flag of Turkish people). This concept is used by many artists (with slight differences such as the death body of Constantine XI) in different times and in different styles. Here you can see a different version of the art [2] and here is the version I uploaded [3]. Also, this is another version of the one I uploaded [4]. I'm searching for an artist name... Deliogul 18:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow, two new versions are founded in a minute! Please look at this link [5]. This is an internet market so maybe they would remove it in couple of days so it is better you look at the link immediately. See you, Deliogul 18:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't speak Turkish, but that link appears to imply that it was published in the 1970s, which would mean it's not public domain, and with no other information available, it's not licensed in any way that would allow us to use it here. It looks like a classical painting, but without knowing who painted it (or at least when it was painted), we can't presume permission to post it here. Is that what the page says? grendel|khan 20:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

You got it wrong. I just tried to show you the different versions of the painting. It is like a Hollywood cliché. Many artists used the same setting and structure, therefore it is transformed into some type of a pattern. People don't take permission from the producers of the older films about, for example, car chase scenes because it is a pattern which is used by the every sector of the American film industry. Is it clear now? I'm still searching for an artist name but it is hard to find who thought this "Mehmed II at the gates of Constantinople" thing first. Deliogul 20:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see now that the painting you linked to isn't the same as the painting that's currently uploaded. But the problem isn't that the uploaded image is a painting of Mehmed II at the gates of Constantinople; the problem is that it's a specific painting of Mehmed II at Constantinople. If you can find out who painted the currently-uploaded painting, or at least when it was painted, that's what we need. If there's a painting of the subject made before 1923, we can use that; if not, we can't--at least not without permission, which painters tend not to give. Where did you get the uploaded image from? Did you take a photo at a museum, or scan a book? Either source would tell you when the painting was made, and by who. grendel|khan 20:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
You are great! Thanks for searching. Deliogul 19:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Image sort order

Hello,

Have a question for you, I have been working on the Commons classification of 19th century european painting, as you are well aware image naming is very much ultimately left to the uploader. Which is good, we want as many good images, and naming is not crutial.

Now, how can I make categories to show in a sensible way? Ideally I want the images to show sorted by year they were painted (assuming of curse tha approxmiate date is known). That helps to see the evolution of an artist. Also, assume yo go to commons ans you see the :commons:Category:1959 paintings or any for that mater, all the painting s get sorted by their image name wchich can cause differente images of the same painting to show up in completely different locations (even pages, if more than 200 images are int the category),

I found that the best scheme for all of this to work best is to upload images with name: <year they were painted> <Artist name as seen in creator template> - <Painting name> That really works great, but of course it is bejond reasonable effort to rename all existing images. My solution has been to use SORTORDER, and then the images sort very well.

A similar issue of getting the critical information from a paiting is with nav pop ups. so I have been ading a single line at the to, so that yo can see the critical infomration of the painting when you use navigational popups.

At the end this permits the category to look a lot more like the gallery. In particular it lets find missing images in the gallery at-a-glance.

You know of any better way to archive all this automatic sorting and consisntent pre-view in navigation pop ups? You mind if I keep using SORTORDER and using the single summary line at the top? maybe there is a better tool than nav popups that I am not aware of.

Thanks. --JuanPDP 02:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Aphid photo

Hi Grendalkhan, I found and put up a new aphid photo (Image:Aphid1533.JPG). I hope that will work. Pollinator 03:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Incidently my favorite aphid photo is Image:Ladybird aphid 7462.jpg. Pollinator 04:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Weaving labrador photo

Thanks for the interest and request. This would've been much easier to figure out if whoever moved my photos to commons had been kind enough to move all of the original information, including date & location of shot, information about the dog, links to appropriate articles, orignal photo name, etc. Instead all that info was trashed and I don't know that I could even find it in the deletion log from 2 years back if I wanted to. I wonder how many other photos people have trashed all that carefully entered info for. Grrr. (Not meant to be a gripe at you, but why on earth wouldn't someone preserve that info?)

Anyway, I've found the original and I'll see whether I can provide a larger version. Not sure--it was taken with a film camera and converted by the print shop and their quality & resolution varied dramatically from job to job.

Elf | Talk 19:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, nope, originally is only about 800 pixels. To make it larger, all I can figure out to do is to upsample (resample), which makes it grainy, which probably takes it out of the quality image category. If I have time and money and so on, I could take the negative in and have it printed or scanned at a higher resolution, but obviously this isn't a high priority. THings have changed so much on wikipedia from when I started--at the time, people kept telling me that we were aiming for 600 to 800 max width or height, so that's what I created and uploaded. (heaves deep sigh). Elf | Talk 19:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism in form of scurrilous and unsupported apparent libel in Timmy Mallett article

This individual: 89.31.225.87 appears to have added a completely unsubstantiated and apparently libellous section to the Timmy Mallett article. He or she also has made similar vandalism changes elsewhere. I've remonstrated, perhaps you would?

Image you nominated promoted to FP

Maurycy Gottlieb - Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Maurycy Gottlieb - Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur.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. Enuja 01:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
POTD

Great Khan,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Maurycy Gottlieb - Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 21, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-09-21. In the normal FIFO queue, it was supposed to come up on August 2, but I figured Yom Kippur was a good day to show this. howcheng {chat} 23:54, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

more about image question at help desk

Thanks for your answer [6]. I would like a little bit of clarification (I first wrote this at the help desk, but I have a feeling older queries get lost over there). The pieces I'm looking at are cartes de visite, which were created often for families or galleries. I don't know the history of the pieces, they may have never been "displayed" in a public forum. From what you linked to, if this type of distribution isn't considered "publishing", most would seem to fall under "Unpublished anonymous and pseudonymous works, and works made for hire (corporate authorship)" of "Unpublished works when the death date of the author is not known", and thus be PD if created before 1887 (many cartes de visite are). These pieces are usually hosted by academic sites, and even given public domain rules, the digital images are often hosted with claimed restrictions on their redistribution, such as requiring written permission for their redistribution (see Image:WHS Image ID 45364.jpg). Sometimes it is claimed that copyright rests with the heirs of the creators of documents, such as here. Then again, this may be a copyright notice attached to all images in that particular archive, whether the copyright has expired or no, or it may just be incorrect. I'm sorry to bother you more, but one area in WP I've especially little experience with is images, and I don't want to do things incorrectly. Please let me know if this question should be directed elsewhere. Thanks, Smmurphy(Talk) 23:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

It's an unfortunately-common occurrence for organizations to claim what's been termed "copyfraud"--copyright on something they don't actually own--since there's plenty of benefit to and no penalty for doing so. Copyright rests with the heirs only if copyright still exists on the item. Your options here are (a) yield to the chilling effect, and don't use the media, or (b) do the research yourself for each individual piece. If it has no author attached and was created before 1887, you're good to go. If it has an author attached who died before 1937, you're good to go. Make sure you justify your copyright tagging when you upload the images. Beware, IANAL; this is just what I would do if I were in your shoes. grendel|khan 15:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
That seems like the right thing to me, too, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable about it if this whole "copyfraud" thing didn't exist. It seems like the organizations doing it aren't trying to break the law (AGF?), I'd feel better if what you just said was written up in a WP policy somewhere. Is it? Is that something we could do (I'm thinking at least having an essay on copyfraud, and trying to get it mentioned in WP:COPY)? Looking up "copyfraud", WP has had many discussions on the term, here is one of the more informative, Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#Question about PD-old and Smithsonian (it links to an interesting court case, as well). [7] and (related) [8] discuss the legal ramifications and would be a good basis for our argument. I also noticed that the issue comes up often at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Can I use.... Then again, perhaps this falls under WP:CREEP, or WP enjoys living in the gray area as much as the academic libraries do. Best, Smmurphy(Talk) 16:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

More about your Citing mailing lists question on Help desk

I added a late reply to your question: WP:HD#Citing mailing lists? (permanent link). --Teratornis 18:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Table: namespace

A long looong time ago, I proposed that tables be moved into their own namespace and transcluded into article with image-like syntax (this was before templates were introduced). You were the only dissenting opinion. Can you explain why you didn't/don't think this is a good idea? — Omegatron 21:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Request to multi-license images.

I've gotten a request to multi-license these photos, which you worked on, under the {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} license. Please let me know if you would be okay with that, and I'll re-license the images once I've gotten everyone's consent: Polydactyly 01 Lfoot AP.jpg, Polydactyly 01 Rfoot AP.jpg, Polydactyly 01 Lhand AP.jpg and Polydactyly 01 Rhand AP.jpg grendel|khan 17:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes that's fine by me. My edits were minor compared to taking the original photographs and I prefer the cc-by-sa licenses in any case. Thanks for taking the time to ask. -- Solipsist 17:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Andreas Baader.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Andreas Baader.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Image problems

I see you did something with my images, and such; and I am resigned editing under another account; but your words have sparked something. "The user got barnstars from a sockpuppet, also resigned". Is tellyaddict a sockpuppet of someone, or are you seeing he is a sock of me? Please leave a reply and I will be sure to read it. Retiono Virginian 13:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I apologize. It took me a while to list those images, and I couldn't understand why someone would give a photographer's barnstar to a user who habitually nicked copyrighted images and made fraudulent claims about them, and sockpuppetry was the first thing that came to mind. Suspicions aren't evidence; thus, I withdraw the accusation. I've left a note on the discussion on the Adminstrator's Noticeboard, and I've edited the PUI request to reflect that. grendel|khan 21:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Accused me of socpuppetry

Hello, you accused me of sockpuppetry when I edited as User:Tellyaddict saying that I got barnstars from my sockpuppet and that one of my other accounts was Retiono Virginians which it is not and never was, with respect those kind of wild accusations can seriously damage someones repuation on Wikipedia - even innocent users. I now edit under this account not because RV retired, because of the reasons on my userpage (Tellyaddict), feel free to comment on this at WP:ANI. Kindest regards - The Sunshine Man 18:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

See above, as well as the administrator's noticeboard. grendel|khan 21:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
A checkuser was ran and it turned out that my current account (The Sunshine Man) and my old account (Tellyaddict) were not related to Mr Oompapa and his socks.The Sunshine Man 19:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Surreal Barnstar.png The Surreal Barnstar
I hereby confer you, Grendelkhan this barnstar for your excellent contribution in images, including film photographs and pictures of Lady Byron. Continue your good work! WooyiTalk to me? 19:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Holy cow! I'm speechless. Thanks! grendel|khan 21:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

YouTube

There is, at the very least, some debate over whether YouTube is actually in violation of copyright. I believe the matter is being settled in court at the moment?

Anyway, I don't really care. Gorman 22:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:KSokoban-screenshot.png

Hello, Grendelkhan. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:KSokoban-screenshot.png) was found at the following location: User:Grendelkhan/Images. This image or media will be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 17:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Source of Image:Locotypes.gif

I have added the requested source info. It's from the Finnish 1919 "Tietosanakirja" ("Encyclopedia"), and due to its age, it's PD. Greetings, --Janke | Talk 14:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I see that Finland has publication+70 copyright for unsigned works (which, I take it, illustrations in the encyclopedia are), so, public domain. Excellent! grendel|khan 03:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Willimantic River

I was trying to be helpful adding in the coordinates. Sorry for any confusion, and thanks for fixing my dumb error. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I was wrong too. I think it's all straightened out now, though; the thing is, the coordinates on the Willimantic River page on GNIS are missing the end-point; the furthest downstream listed there is somewhere in Columbia Lake. The coordinates of its confluence with the Natchaug (its end-point) are listed on the Natchaug River's article, which is what I additionally cited. Of course, if you look at it on Google Maps, it points to some forest right next to the confluence... but I'm not going to bet on whether the USGS is wrong or Google Maps has failed to line up properly. Thanks for all your help! grendel|khan 15:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Glad to be of some help - I have written to places where I have found errors before, sometimes they fix them. Do you know about the USGS discharge data - here is the link for the whole Thames River basin (PDF). I will add a Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers tag on the talk page. Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
That is useful; I've cited it on the Mansfield Hollow Lake article, which I've also been working on. grendel|khan 16:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


Non-free use disputed for Image:Tool-Undertow.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BigrTex 21:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Origins of Image:National Cathedral Sanctuary Panorama.jpg.

Was this image created with Hugin? There's a category on Commons, where I've uploaded this image, which I'd like to tag this image with if it's appropriate. grendel|khan 17:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Control point alignment was done with Autopano-SIFT, the resulting file was opened in Hugin 0.4 beta and blended by smartblend. Noclip 17:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Picture cropped?

Is the wax play picture cropped, because it sure looks that way to me. If you have an uncropped version, putting it up would make the image more noticeable and clear. --The Little Internet Kitty 01:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Nope; that's the full frame from the camera. (I have the original somewhere around; the version that's up there resized, but not cropped.) I figured I'd crop it at a 'tasteful' point. grendel|khan 01:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Basic instinct 001.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Basic instinct 001.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. Ilse@ 15:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Doshin the Giant screenshot.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Doshin the Giant screenshot.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 04:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Re-added to the article (there were no in-game screenshots); removed tag from image. grendel|khan 18:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

J. Neil Schulman and permissions

I'm J. Neil Schulman, subject of the article by that title on Wikipedia. This may be verified by going to my website at http://www.jneilschulman.com/, scrolling down to Contact, and emailing me at the email address posted there.

I authorize excerpts from my bio at http://www.pulpless.com/jneil/jnsbio.html to be used within the Wikipedia article on me.

Fair use rationale for Image:Doshin_the_Giant_screenshot.jpg

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Doshin_the_Giant_screenshot.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation 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. BigrTex 23:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

John Veron

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on John Veron, by 75.184.93.159 (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because John Veron fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

should we list ever professor in the world on wikipedia?


To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting John Veron, 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. --Android Mouse Bot 2 05:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:All I Did Was Ask.bookcover.amazon.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:All I Did Was Ask.bookcover.amazon.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. —Angr 12:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Doshin_the_Giant.gamecover.amazon.jpg

I have tagged Image:Doshin_the_Giant.gamecover.amazon.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. BigrTex 18:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. grendel|khan 20:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Hulk181.jpg

I have tagged Image:Hulk181.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk 02:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:T. S. Monk.ColumbiaUniversity.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:T. S. Monk.ColumbiaUniversity.jpg. I noticed 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:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Carl (CBM · talk) 16:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ravenous.dvdcover.amazon.jpg)

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Ravenous.dvdcover.amazon.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. BetacommandBot 14:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Deftones_-_Around_the_Fur.jpg

Nuvola apps important blue.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Deftones_-_Around_the_Fur.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 11:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Seraphim Whipp 11:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I have tagged Image:Deftones_-_Around_the_Fur.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Seraphim Whipp 11:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. grendel|khan 16:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Repo Man.dvdcover.amazon.jpg)

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Repo Man.dvdcover.amazon.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. BetacommandBot 16:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

It took me a while until I realized that it was you creating the fantastic collar image. It would be great to have more images of this great quality on the subject. If there is any chance it would be great if you could inform me. I would love to integrate more motives of this standard into de:BDSM. Kind regards. --Nemissimo 15:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

There's the image on wax play about a year ago; I think that's all I have at the moment for BDSM images. If there's demand for more collar pictures specifically, I may see about making some more. grendel|khan 16:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I have integrated wax play into de:BDSM about 1.5 years ago. It also will be part of next "edition" of the :en BDSM article witch is on the final stages of its translation and to be moved soon. ;-)
An image with a collection of attractive collars sounds promising. --Nemissimo 18:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ff_firefly.jpg

I have tagged Image:Ff_firefly.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk 06:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Warmen - Alone.jpg

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. grendel|khan 04:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Image of Rock Pigeon

Hi Grendelkhan. The image of the Rock Pigeon you reverted to is I believe a domesticated pigeon (Columba livia domestica). You may have noticed that it is banded and this indicates it is owner bred. It is also a chequered pattern and as such is a different mutation to the original bar pattern Rock Pigeon (Columba livia). Before you changed the image did you happen to notice that there had been discussion of the image change on the articles talk page? Wouldn't this have been the place to suggest a change like this? Sting au 05:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

After further reading I see there is a problem with a watermark on that other image. Pity as its a better representative of the species than the picture you have chosen (apart from it being obviously domesticated). I'm trying to get the author of the other image to upload a copy without the watermark. No response yet, but if I can get that one I'm going to put it on the Rock Pigeon page. Cheers, Sting au 05:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Elfen Lied ep4 Nyuu.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Elfen Lied ep4 Nyuu.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation 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. —Angr 18:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Elfen Lied ep4 Nyuu.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Elfen Lied ep4 Nyuu.jpg. I noticed 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:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

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 even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cruis'n Exotica.jpg)

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Cruis'n Exotica.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. BetacommandBot 02:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Man on Fire.dvdcover.amazon.jpg)

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Man on Fire.dvdcover.amazon.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:DMX - The Great Depression.albumcover.jpg

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. grendel|khan 04:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Matilda.bookcover.amazon.jpg

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jazz Jackrabbit gameplay.screenshot.png

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. grendel|khan 04:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jazz Jackrabbit titlescreen.screenshot.png

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. grendel|khan 04:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Js-hello world.png

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. (It's no longer a non-free image; it was replaceable.) grendel|khan 04:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Grendelkhan/Archive2&oldid=784481591"