User talk:Ladida/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello, Ladida/Archive 1, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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:Questions, 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! Mushroom (Talk) 02:40, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not having my night, I accidently reverted to some older version of the Behind The Walls screencapture (which you added). I instantly reverted it back, I'm really sorry Ladida. I noticed from your user page that you're part of the Counter-Vandalism Unit, so you'll probably have tons of experience of cleaning up after people. Could you please do the same for stupid old me? I'm going to stay away from Wikipedia for a while... again I'm sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brucevdk (talk • contribs) 22:02, 20 May 2006

Hi, just to clear my edit up. I meant that it was not a WWW view because autmn/fall happen at different times throughout the year - not because "fall" is an American term - I'm not opposed to the term "fall" - just that it happens at different times in different places. Your doing a great job at the PB page, though I have not been editing there as much as I used to, as Iam avoiding season one spoilers, so I'll be editing it again in a couple of weeks. Cheers. Cvene64 - 13:55, 22 May 2006

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Dominic Purcell.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images 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. Arniep 17:27, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please note we can't use images owned by agencies such wireimage, AP (associated press), AFP, Getty (Image:Wentworth miller.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion). Regards Arniep 17:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this Image:Amaury Nolasco.jpg also needs the source. Thanks Arniep 17:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Swcallies.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Casey stratton.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds 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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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. 04:04, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

• I was in the process of doing so when OrphanBot sent me this message. Ladida

Could you give me one good reason why you deleted Mike Jones? Here are two reasons why I put him back.

1. He appeared in more than one episode.
2. He is notable off screen.

Therefore, he IS a notable guest star. M. Burmy

• Response here. Ladida 23:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Just a friendly anon dropping you a quick message to congratulate and thank you on all the accurate, comprehensive work you have been doing on Prison Break!

Cheers!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.144.252 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 7 June 2006

• Thank you! Ladida 10:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a wiki all about Prison Break and was just informing you as your knowledge of the subject is invaluable. PB22

• Response here. Ladida 12:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PB22:

PB-Prison Break

22-22 episodes of prison break (so far)

hey stop removing our forum site on the prison break wikipedia

we're making the best fan page, and you're not helping.

you're clearly not a prison break fan.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.119.60 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 22 June 2006

• As you said it yourself, your site is a forum site and is often deemed inappropriate for Wikipedia articles. However, upon revising the rules stated in Wikipedia:External_links#Occasionally_acceptable_links, I will leave your link as it is. Other fansites have been removed from the page prior to this. Moreover, the external links section is NOT for you to advertise your site. -- Ladida 10:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

would u stop removing the fansite

jesus christ

What is wrong with you?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.17.163 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 24 June 2006

• Please see Talk:Prison_Break#Fansite. Ladida 00:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Can you people stop removing the prison break site? How come you guys are deleting that but not the wiki under it? That page has NO CONTENT AT ALL yet that one isnt being removed.
  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.82.199.1990 (talk • contribs) 3:51, 29 June 2006

• The wiki site is technically not a fansite or a forum; unlike yours. That is the reason I have not removed it. However, I am not sure about it. Furthermore, will you please spamming wikipedia? People edit wikipedia articles to improve the quality of the articles, NOT because they want to advertise their site. -- Ladida 07:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question to and reply from Mushroom about external links. -- Ladida 00:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Re: your message on my talk page.) No worries about removing my modifications to the DVD section of the Numb3rs page - you've done a much better job on the DVD table at List of NUMB3RS episodes. However, would it not be better to merge the content currently on 'List of NUMB3RS episodes' with the 'Episodes and DVD releases' section of NUMB3RS? As in, replace that section with the table on the list page, and make the list page into a redirect to the main page. There doesn't seem to be enough content to justify having two pages. Mike Peel 14:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with the split if there was more content. I only tend to justify seperate pages when there is currently too much content for just one page, or they cover seperate topics, though, and I don't think either applies here. I'm also unsure that the season summaries can grow much longer than they already are - the episodes don't tie themselves together well enough to form storylines, which tend to make up most of a normal season summary. I'll post a question about this on the NUMB3RS talk page so that more people can give their opinion on this. I'm OK with leaving the pages as they are for a couple of days, though. Mike Peel 14:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Numb3rs Insignia.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. 10:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ladida. I'm just fairly new at Wikipedia and so I'm not exactly sure how to attach the right copyright things onto the downloaded images.--silverwolf_athame 09:17, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did u delete those Prison Break characters?—Preceding unsigned comment added by DanDud88 (talk • contribs) 14:08, 27 July 2006

Hi, DanDud88. My reason for the removal of those characters' descriptions can be found in Talk:List_of_Prison_Break_characters#Excessive_minor_characters. Although your contribution to the page is appreciated, the list of characters pages are to provide information on the significant characters of the TV show. There is no need to add minor characters that have a tiny role on the show. This is to avoid an exhaustive and excessive list. Regards, Ladida 10:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check Prison Break discussion.

Hello! My English is not so good. Do you know about public domain photos of the Olympic Village in Sydney. If no photos are takken, could you take some? --Julius1990 14:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on Julius1990's talk page. -- Ladida

Thats unfair the Psyc ward orderly is listed and he only appeard in 2 episodes. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanDud88 (talk • contribs) 10:01, 8 August 2006

Replied to DanDud88. -- Ladida

Hi, I got your comment on Beijing Film Academy. I checked all the names for you. They are all correct, except for the one that is linked to http://www.bfa.edu.cn/faculty/filmlogy/index.htm. I read some of the content, and I believe the department is about film theory rather than performing arts. For example, they have a course in film critique and another one in film analysis. After all, there is already a performance institute, so I doubt they would have two deparments/schools for performing. Lulu288 18:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, how come you created a prison break template? ifbx:episode suficed. What i've done is redirected to ifbx:television episode and added annother opt. tag to tv ep so as black BGs work correctly. Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 21:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS: If you created prison break template, background colouring was already in infobox tv episode. Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 21:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see where your coming from and while i would possibly like a template for each show it just shouldnt be done if we can condense them into one template, personally my self i prefer the episode chro. next to each other and not on seperate lines as it doesnt look chuncky then and "blends" well. PS: There may be someway i could "switch" chronologys, ie have two versions. It could be done using advanced template markup.. If you are interested i'll see what i can do today about setting it up, anyway sorry if i annoyed you at changing something you created, I know my self it can be a bother but the best thing we can do is standardise one template. Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 07:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I've restored your pb infobox as the other one is under dispute. Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 09:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Could you please add your opinion (or voice your support or a opposition) at this page.

It could decide the fate of colours in not only episode infoboxes but, nav boxes, celeb boxes.. (The bars in between episodes guides..) etc. MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 11:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only four days or so to go till season two, excited :-D? MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 16:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When does it start down-under ? MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 11:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a bit to go then, I am unsure when it starts on our tiny island :P MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 11:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has started raining now, but i prefer cold weather as i find it difficult to work in hot conditions ^_^ MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 11:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you get a winter down there ? MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 11:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Autblocked? How come :\? MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 11:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does your ISP use proxy server? When i connect i get the same ip address till i reconnect/reboot etc. MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 11:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Blocked again!) Actually, I think it does. I have to go and start doing my assignments now. You get so many assignments when you get into university. Sigh. (I am sighing a lot cos I am procrastinating about the assignments). Hope to talk to you again soon. :) Ladida 11:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that cant be easy, anyway ttyl MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 11:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I though you'd already done this for me. I'll fix it right away. -- T smitts 04:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The previous image had no source, and is darker. -- DrBat 12:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi' I humbly ask you the reason why you deleted the edit on the last episode of prison break season 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Demorphica (talk • contribs) 22:34, 26 August 2006

Replied on Demorphica's talk page.

With all due respect... Tell me Ladida, if a person in south-east Asia needs to know the detailed episode summary of a TV show which does not air in their country, how do they go about it?
There is a real need of a resource to be available for this. As to your words on the summary needing to be on the main page, the summary present there is a very brief Season summary, and not an episode summary, which is nowhere near detailed enough.
If for example I am needed to submit a report on American TV shows, and i need to expound upon the differences in plot 'dynamics' between American shows as opposed to those airing in my country, I believe there should be a resource available. In my opinion, the well-formatted episode list tables are the best place for this.
After all, i believe the essence of any encyclopedia is verbosity. That is why we say it is 'encyclopedic'. The articles avilable are not available on a need-to-know basis, but rather, a want-to-know basis. And that i believe is a step towards freedom of availability of information, which in turn is a step towards the actual assimilation of information.
Do reply and tell me where I am wrong, if I am. Demorphica 00:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Demorphica. I think you misunderstood my meaning of "main article". I meant the main article of the individual episode, as in the page that you will be directed to if you click on the episode title. Of course you are welcome to expand on those summaries. I am sorry if I confused you. The reason you shouldn't really add any more onto those short summaries in the List of Prison Break episodes page is because there is very limited room and it should only provide a quick summary of each episode. Good examples of these "List of TV episodes" pages are given in the Wikipedia:WikiProject List of Television Episodes page. Regards, Ladida 07:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ladida

I noticed that you edit the Prison Break episodes very frequently and thoroughly. So I figured I would ask you your opinion on spoiler tags in the episode summaries. I have edited a main template to create a prison break spoiler tag, which provides a link to the List of Prison Break episodes page.

However there seems to be some contention over the use of spoiler tags. Although I have already implemented them throughout the Prison Break pages, if spoiler warnings are a problem let me know. Personally I feel it is obvious that a spoiler is coming but that others might be caught out. GenestealerUK 12:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Generally spoiler tags should be present at the top of all the television episodes articles, which is basically all articles which contain a plot summary. I remember putting those tags in all the season 1 episodes' articles after the US season 1 finale, if they weren't already there. I haven't noticed if the second season's episodes' articles were tagged or not, since I personally don't care about spoilers. You're right, all those articles should be spoiler tagged. I was just wondering, why didn't you use {{spoiler}} instead of creating a new one, not that I have anything against it but I was just curious. :) -- Ladida 12:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing someone removed the spoiler tags then. I previewed several including the main one, however they either didn't link at all to the List of Episodes or didn't link correctly. This is because the headers on that page aren't simply "Season 1" but have a date following them. Therefore the automated links didn't work, so I had to create a template that linked directly to the page regardless of which Season the episode is.GenestealerUK 12:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Good work! -- Ladida 12:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, well i do think it would be a good idea to go the Lost way on the matter of characters, it would probably also be neater and more informative. On the second matter i'd happily help you improve the article . thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 09:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoying S2 then :)? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:10, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Loving it, the storys have been great so far this season :-) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, It's looking pretty nice now, imo much better then the old list format (PS: Do you use MSN messenger/windows live messenger?) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If youd liek we can speak on WLM my messenger address is: matthew@[trimmed] thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:36, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for the note. I noticed no edit for several minutes so I went ahead and made the reversion. Please bear in mind that, with some templates, changes can show up simultaneously on hundreds of pages. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 00:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm aren't all of those links to fansites? What makes one site a fansite and the other NOT a fansite when they have the same content? (72.152.206.100 07:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)).[reply]

I am currently working on seperate pages for the inuyasha episodes. I'm asking if you would help me. I currently did the first episode: The Girl Who Overcame Time...and the Boy Who Was Just Overcome. If you want to help, please leave a comment. Thank you (Bobabobabo 20:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Ladida, I found Image:207 buried surpriseMOW.jpg at http://www.prisonbreak-online.com/ and the copyright is Fox and its related entities. -- Martinw93 11:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on Martinw93's talk page. -- Ladida

I'll try and modify the photos like you asked, but I think the new picture for Veronica is better than the old one. I think the old one was unflattering for Robin Tunney and the new one is also a Prison Break promotional shot.--CyberGhostface 10:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did a search for other Veronica photos. I found this one but its rather small, so if you can find the bigger one that'd be fine. However, 90% of the sites I searched had the new image I uploaded, including the official site's photo gallery.--CyberGhostface 20:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you seem to be one of the main people behind the Prison Break articles, I thought I should give you a heads up on a certain...problem that might plague us over the next couple of days or weeks.

You may or may not have heard of Abu Badali, a user who has added nothing constructive to Wikipedia but instead just trys to remove fair use picture. It seems he is targeting some of the Prison Break character articles. I'll try dealing with it the best I can, but any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks again.--CyberGhostface 03:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Fox.com as its source, although the official links to the photos seem to no longer exist. Do you know of any other suitable source?

Thanks for your quick response, btw.--CyberGhostface 03:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the exact source, although I do know they were promotional photos officially released by Fox. They've appeared in several places now, including TV Guide, Yahoo, IMDB and numerous TV sites.--CyberGhostface 03:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am not sure whether you can help me with this but your help would be appreciated. This is about your recent edits to the promotional images of Prison Break characters. Given the source is provided for a known promotional image, is it not sufficient that a fair use rationale is also provided since the terms of use says that you can "download material from this Site for your own use and you must keep all copyright and other proprietary notices attached to the downloaded material". I know it does say "the reproduction, duplication, distribution (including by way of email, facsimile or other electronic means), publication, modification, copying or transmission of material from this Site is strictly prohibited unless you have obtained the prior written consent of FOX" but the utilisation of the image in Wikipedia isn't really any of those things. This also concerns images downloaded from Yahoo!. Doesn't a fair use rationale provide an explanation that this is not for commercial use? If it is prohibited, does this mean we have to remove all the images downloaded from these sites, because that's a lot of images since all television network sites has similar terms of use (like FOX, CBS and ABC)? I am asking you this because a lot of images from TV show articles are downloaded from these sites. Also, is this copyright issue covered in Wikipedia? Wikipedia:Fair_use#Images doesn't really say anything specific. Thank you, Ladida 08:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ladida. The problem in this cases is the misuse of the {{promotional}}, {{promo}}, {{publicity}}, and related tags. These tags are intended for material coming from a press kit or similar source. Images used in tv-series websites are not necessarly intended to be widely used by the media. The company producing the tv-series may want to have some exclusive pictures for it's official website or to have some other kind of strict control over how it's material are used. That's why we need to read the Terms of Use from such websites to be sure the images are for widespread media use.

Images found on fansites or blogs sould never be used in these cases, as these sites are either resusers (and not a source) of promotional material or simply copyright violators.

As a more safe strategy, I would suggest using (a limited number of) screenshots to illustrated tv-series characters. For such images, provide as "source information" the tv-series name, the chapter the screenshot was taken from, the company producing the series, etc. This is a fully verifiable source information for the image.

For the specific case of the recent "Prision Break" images I have tagged, they do not contain verifiable source information. The only info available is that they come from fox.com and are promotional material. Neither can I find the images on fox.com nor have I any reason to believe images from that site are promotional.

And the use of this images on Wikipedia is all of reproduction, duplication, distribution, publication, and transmission. So, it's not ok for us to use such images as promotional material.

The point is that these images are part of those website contens. They are part of the value of the websites. Those websites are not simply a vehicle for the company advertising the tv-series. They are a product themselves. And our use of parts of it degrades the value of them as a product.

Let me know if I can still be of any help. Best regards, --Abu Badali 16:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. So should we remove those images or leave them? The other thing is they are used everywhere or I've come across many of them during my perusal of television show articles. Anyway, thanks again for your explanation. :) Ladida 05:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I would say it would be wise to remove all images mistakenly tagged as promotional you find. Tag them as {{imagevio}} (and follow the instructions at the top of this tag to list the image at WP:CP) For the image you have uploaded yourself, tag them with {{db-author}}, and they will be eventually removed.

If you feel some tv-series character deserves being pictured, consider adding one screenshot showing him/her to the article. Search Wikipedia for an existing screenshot before uploading a new one. At the screenshot page, add as much source information as you can (the series name, episode number, airing date, the company producing the series, etc). I know this is not a common pratice for screenshots here, but it's a problem that we will eventually have to deal with.

Drop me a note whenever you think I can be of any help! Best regards, --Abu Badali 14:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Pb season1 tancredi.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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.

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ReyBrujo 03:56, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to User_talk:ReyBrujo. -- Ladida 06:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your explanation for requesting a speedy deletion is that it is orphaned and terms of use violation However, you did not explain why it is a terms of use violation, and orphaned fair use images can be speedied after a week, not immediately. If you want to delete it because it is orphaned, you need to use {{orfud}}. Otherwise, check here to see if any of the speedy criteria applies for the image. The safest way is just orphan it and tag it as orphaned. Hope that clears it out. -- ReyBrujo 16:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious as to why you attached a speedy tag to this with the reason copyright violation, no original source. It has a perfectly valid fair use assertion and it includes a link to its source. Grandmasterka 08:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Fair use is the guide to using copyrighted pictures in articles. Otherwise, I think the image tags themsleves are very descriptive at spelling out the information that needs to be provided. (It's fair to assume this image is a promotional photo since it's being used on Yahoo, I think.) I have to go and I probably won't be on here for a couple days. You could chat with more image-centered users if you need further advice, such as User:Carnildo. Grandmasterka 16:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work cleaning up Kidman's article --Steve 00:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Havent seen you on messenger in several weeks, having any problems? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 13:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to discuss some of the changes made to the various Prison Break articles of late. It's good that someone is providing some regular maintenance, but I think some of removal of articles were unnecessary, though I agree that some were justified. I'll list some of the ones I think apply to either category:

Ones I think should have an article:

• Roy Geary: Had he only appeared in Season 1, I might have agreed with keeping it with nothing, but since he's appeared regularly this season as Bellick's right-hand man on top of his role last season, I think he warrants his own article.
• Nick Savrinn: He appeared in nearly every episode in season 1 and played a fairly prominent role in uncovering the conspiracy before being killed off. If Westmoreland's season long stint warrants an article, so does Nick's.
• Daniel Hale: He was a major character in the first half of season 1 (which was almost a distinct season in itself from the second half) and had a clear character arc.
• Samantha Brinker: She was featured as prominently in the second half of season 1 as Hale did in the first. She also represents "the Company" and may yet return.
• Manche Sanchez: He played a large role in the second half as well

Ones I agree don't need an article:

• Debra Jean Belle: She appeared in, what, three episodes? Since she really only interacted with Tweener, who is now dead, I agree an article is unecessary.
• Quinn: He appeared in only two episodes (three if you count the body glimpsed in a later episode).
• Philly Falzone: Appeared only briefly early in season 1 and is unlikely to ever be seen again.
• Robert Hudson: Appeared in only two episodes (two halves of a two-part episode at that) before being killed off.

Nika Volek and William Kim I'm somewhat on the fence about. Either may yet return (the latter seems more likely). I'm just not sure.

I'd like to hear back from you on some of this and get your thoughts. For now, I'll just restore Geary and Nick because I think the reasons are most evident. Thank you.--T smitts 06:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you reverted the wiki page to not include the summaries, these have been sourced from the FOX website, please explain why you have done it?

82.32.9.6 14:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, you plagarised from that site. Secondly, they say it's from Fox but the link provided goes to Fox's official page and not the press release page. Even if those statements were credible, they are not well sourced. Links to media and press releases are more reliable and should be used as your source instead of spoilers sites. Regards, Ladida 23:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to talk to you about restoring the recurring characters back to the template. It seems to me that the point of a template is to allow visitors to have easy access to other related articles. I'd also like to point out that templates for other shows (such as 24 and The West Wing) do include recurring characters. I also think distinguishing the members of "the Fox River Eight" as such on the template might be useful as well. If I were looking up info on the characters of Prison Break to learn more about the show, I think I'd want to know who the fugitives were.--T smitts 04:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say to the concern that the template was constantly being fiddled with, that wiki articles are quite mercurial things and that they're changed frequently. There will always be someone messing with something and there will always be someone to make it right. I honestly think the template can handle the return of some recurring characters, some of whom play (or played) an integral role on the show (speaking of which, since Michael and Lincoln's father Aldo Burrows will be coming back soon, I think he'll warrant an article soon.) If you are worried about size, I think some of the name's can be cut down, listing the fugitives on the template by their prison names (Except for Michael and Lincoln, who were rarely referred to by their nicknames and Abruzzi and Sucre, who never had nicknames).

I'd also point out that while, yes, each show or movie's template is different, I think most of them do group characters together by their role on the show. As I said, the West Wing and 24 do this. Law & Order does this as well. I would probably agree that a "Fox River Eight" section in the main article was a bit too in-show but I don't think it is to identify characters as such in the template.

In resonse to "I would like to say that if that person was watching the show, they would know about them.", as I said, that assumes the person reading the article IS familiar to the show and has seen enough to know character's names and who they are.--T smitts 09:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"unless you mean linking all the recurring characters that have their own articles." I did. --T smitts 16:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:RobertKnepper.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. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
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 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. -- Chowbok ☠ 23:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:AdamGarcia.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. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{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 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. --Rossrs 07:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have begun RfC procedures for User:Chowbok. Since you've had previous disputes with him about image uploads, maybe you'd like to add your commentary? [1] TheQuandry 02:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored William Kim as an article as he has appeared quite frequently and as his role may expand given the events of the last episode (won't spoil it in case you haven't seen it). I also wondered what you thought about adding the "Prisoners of Prison Break" category to Bellick's article?--T smitts 23:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You put a picture of the fox river eight on the prison break article but only contains 7, it doesn't include patoshik (the con from the insane ayslum) 62.31.72.114 20:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

None of the promotional pictures contained Haywire/Patoshik. It was the only promotional picture that had most of the cast there, which is why I chose that picture to upload. Ladida 05:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I just wanted to know why you removed the episode count feature from the the individual character pages. I thought it was a good feature to have.Thanks EARONHASE 11:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Pb wheeler.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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. 00:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)