User talk:MECU/Archive/2008/March

This is an archive of past discussions with User:MECU. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The College football WikiProject Newsletter Issue IV - March 2008
Project news SatyrBot is now delivering weekly updates to the Wikiproject College Football to-do list. Have a few minutes, but don't want to start a whole new article? Check out the to-do list and knock one or two items off. If everyone pitches in, it'll go a long way towards making Wikiproject College Football the best source for college football information on the Internet. Gwguffey has created a series of navigation boxes for college football stadiums for every state in the United States. If you're creating an article about a new stadium or updating a current article about a stadium, be sure to include one. It'll make the page more useful to readers, and they look darn nice, too. SatyrBot assessed approximately 4,300 previously-unassessed college football articles. There are still over 1,500 unassessed articles out there, so if you get a chance, feel free to lend a hand. If it becomes necessary to use an archaic name for a university, link to the modern name and/or Wikipedia page. Example: Virginia Polytechnic Institute. This is particularly common in articles dealing with subjects prior to the separation of NCAA divisions in the 1970s. (Discussion) A motion to create a Wikiproject High School Football has been brought up on the talk page. Editors are reminded that any template that automatically includes a fair-use image (such as a university logo) will be automatically deleted by Wikipedia. Instead, create a general template that asks the user to select the logo rather than automatically including the logo inside the template.	From JKBrooks85 Welcome to the latest issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter! I hope that you're enjoying regular updates about the goings on of college football on Wikipedia, but if not, feel free to add your name to the "no delivery" section on the newsletter signup page. I encourage everyone to make regular visits to the College Football Portal and perhaps make it your Wikipedia entry page instead of using the Main Page as your gateway. Nominations for selected articles and pictures are always welcome, and can serve as a great way to show off that new article you just shepherded to Good Article status or the great picture you took the last time you were at a game. Comments and suggestions on improving the newsletter are always welcome, and help me improve it on a monthly basis. Keep contributing and editing, and don't hesitate to contact me or post on the College Football Wikiproject talk page if you need help or just want someone to look over your article.
New high-rank articles Greg Skrepenak — Promoted to Good Article status on February 1. George Hoey — Promoted to Good Article status on February 6. John Maulbetsch — Promoted to Good Article status on February 6. Bump Elliott — Promoted to Good Article status on February 8. 2007 ACC Championship Game — Promoted to Featured Article status on February 10. Bob Chappuis — Promoted to Good Article status on February 13. Butch Woolfolk — Promoted to Good Article status on February 13. Marquise Walker — Promoted to Good Article status on February 17. 2008 Orange Bowl — Promoted to Featured Article status on February 21. Ralph Heikkinen — Promoted to Featured Article status on February 24.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder about spring games. I'll put a note in the next newsletter along with some tips on photography. JKBrooks85 (talk) 01:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Mecu,

I am using your Template:Linescore Amfootball in my creation of the page 2002 Arkansas Razorbacks football team. Arkansas and Tennessee played a six overtime game and I am having problems extending the box. Please help!

Brandonrush (talk) 01:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I can help, but I don't see that article or anywhere else. Either way, to add overtime period, just add H5= and R5= and H6= and R6= and they should show up and automatically be added to the final score. I know 5 works, I believe I've seen up to 7 or 8. If you point me to the actual article I can take a look at any problem you might be having. You can look at the documentation on the template page which I linked in your text above for more information. Also, when starting a new discussion on a talk page, you should click the "+" button at the top of the talk page and it will create a new section at the bottom of the page for you. Good luck! MECU≈talk 13:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

It's right here, but I was typing it in Word when I asked you. It only goes out to the fourth OT. Brandonrush (talk) 15:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

All fixed up to 6 OTs. MECU≈talk 15:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Brandonrush (talk) 21:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello Mecu, please check the permission for this image. Thank you. --80.171.30.222 (talk) 16:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I copied the OTRS permission from the related images. You can having someone else on OTRS verify that the ticket covers that image as well if you wish. MECU≈talk 18:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Why did you revert my speedy tag on Image:John R Thomas Court Room.JPG? It would have been helpful if you'd given a reason. andy (talk) 17:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

This image was created for the U.S. Federal Government (Department of Health and Human Services) and is public domain. That is specified in its description. The said agency is my current employer.Amiaheroyet (talk) 05:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

fixed. LanceBarber (talk) 15:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

It appears the U.S. Department of the Interior has redesigned their site since I copied the image from there over two years ago. I can't find any Kachina doll images on the DOI site anymore. That's the nature of information on the Internet -- it's not static, unlike a printed book, and if you don't grab it today, it may not be there tomorrow. Sorry, I can't help you more. —Quicksilver^{T @} 16:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the head-up warning you gave on the images you tagged as missing source info. I messed that up a lot on my early days as an editor, and a few have been deleted without my knowledge. I appreciate the chance to fix them, not everyone gives that friendly warning. bahamut0013♠♣ 17:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I have tagged Image:KC-A_2922.gif 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. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 00:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:Logo fox.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 12:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

This is concerning the tags you put on my HAZMAT images. I marked all of them as coming from a government agency, which they did (U.S. Department of Transportation). I was assuming that doing so was sufficient. Am I remiss? Should I explicitly state that they're from USDOT? Just curious. Nickersonl (talk) 04:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

The above mentioned graphics are the work of a government agency (U.S. DOT) and not copyrighted, so I don't think sourcing applies beyond what I've indicated.Nickersonl (talk) 14:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

It would be best to provide a link to the website that you got the images from (or any other means you got them, like via email). Please link to a HTML page with the image on it. It is not enough to state "I got it from <x government agency>." as the source cannot be verified then. MECU≈talk 16:48, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I'll make the changes as time permits me.Nickersonl (talk) 14:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Update: As of the time stamp indicated on this line, I've added the appropriate source information for all the HAZMAT placards. Would you mind taking a look and seeing if the way I did it is acceptable?Nickersonl (talk) 15:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Your bot tagged http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:East_High_School_Salt_Lake_City.jpg for deletion because I didn't use some proper form template for it. I don't know anything about whatever templates wikipedia is using now for images that is required. Can you put the proper templates on the image for me? William Ortiz (talk) 18:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

The image gives the copyright information in the text, so why'd you tag if it wasn't some automated tagging? William Ortiz (talk) 20:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I am curious about the removal of the speedy tag for Image:Ivanios.gif. I understand teh uploader is asserting a release. But I don't actually believe the individual has the rights to the image as it appears to be copied from a website. I don't normally deal with images, but I have come across text copyright violations, and the usual action if something is being released under the GFDL (or compatible) is to get an OTRS ticket to confirm. Should this have been tagged with a regular imagevio tag? Your help would be appreciated. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh. And ditto with Image:St. Mary's Cathedral.jpg. Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 17:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I had recently tagged 3 images on page Katol for copyright violation. I had also provided the source of those images. But I was surprised to see deletion tag removed. Any reason? Pls excuse my poor formatting as i'm using blckberry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gppande (talk • contribs) 18:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

ok, i see ur expln in hist smry. But source website says complete copyright at bottom. Is this not violation since it is not even fair use. It is complete copy paste from a .com website —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gppande (talk • contribs) 19:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

image:Katol oranges.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gppande (talk • contribs) 19:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion. I would list the images on WP:PUI --gppande «talk» 09:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

"under fair use, not copyvio then" - fair use yes. But it is in the first place an illegal crop/derivative of the original. If he had uploaded the original and then used that as fair use, it would have been a different matter. Here, what he's done in effect is uploaded a cpvio and then using it as fair use. Certainly speedy-able. Sarvagnya 18:41, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I'm supposed to discuss this here but I'm to stupid or lazy to figure it out. Correct me. Anyway... The image "mutant vampire.jpg" was in use on the chupacabra article, but it was replaced with an image I find ridiculous. "Mutant vampire" might not be ideal for the article, but I strongly feel it is more relevant than the current picture. (It looks like a martian.) Malevolentsteel (talk) 23:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Terminator 2- Judgment Day (pinball).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Terminator 3- Rise of the Machines (pinball).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

He are somne further attributions for yer perusal. Image:RT4.jpg and Image:RTF4.jpg are derived from Col. John M. Schlight, A War Too Long. Washington DC: Air Force History and Museums Program, 1999. Image:RT1.jpg and Image:RTMiG.jpg are from Earl Tilford's Setup. Maxwell Air Force Base AL: Air University Press, 1991. Image:RTPY.jpg is from Jacob Van Staaveren's Gradual Failure. Washington DC: Air Force History and Museums Program, 2002. Any further questions concerning my usage of U.S. military images? RM Gillespie (talk) 04:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

It says right on it US Air Force Museum. and has a Government copyright. So delete it if you want I don't care. Copyright law and thousands of interpretations of it have reduced information exchange into the slash and burn of the dark ages. Have fun. --Colputt (talk) 16:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Mecu! Somehow I missed your comment/request at the SatyrBot page - sorry about that!!! I've changed the schedule so the bot updates the WikiProject "maintenance" pages on Mondays and Thursdays. It's not much of a drain at all, so if you want it run daily, let me know on User talk:SatyrTN.

You asked a couple questions, too. The "short list" is (except for the deletion section) a random list. It would be possible to determine the date each was tagged and put the oldest, but that's not the way I programmed the bot <sheepish grin> Hope that helps - and let me know if you have any further questions! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

On 19 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cody Hawkins, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 15:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I notice that you speedy deleted an image from the contributor's contributions. Did you know that all of her images were wrongly uploaded as CC-by-SA. She works for UCLA's digital library and was told by her boss to upload Los Angeles Times images with their permission. The Los Angeles Times website is clearly marked CC-BY-SA-NC with non-commericial use specified. I proposed one image for deletion, and she contacted me. I engaged her in discussion, and I was later joined by User:Evrik. She asked me to talk with her attorney, which I did. I got no responses and the situation was not cleared up. I can forward you the relevant emails if you send me your email address, although there doesn't appear to be a point in doing that. All of her images should be deleted. See her talk page. Would you please deal with it since you are so experienced with images? Royalbroil 16:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad that you dealt with it. I didn't know that NC was enough reason to speedy it by WP:CSD#I9, so I learned something. I would have probably listed them as a set under possible copyright problems. My RFA passed mainly because I help with updating DYK and I'm generally real conservative with everything else. I avoid the wikidrama. Royalbroil 03:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I hereby award Mecu the "Tireless Contributor Barnstar" for dealing with a group of dubiously licensed images. Dealing with images is a thankless task that often ends in complaints. You deserve a thank you! Royalbroil 18:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I have tried to do this right. Many times. I am actually exhausted with trying. I just want to contribute fairly. I got passion.

It takes me quite a long time to post up an image. Thanks, Electric Japan (talk) 15:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I will give it a go. Tough do do things on here. Takes time. A lot of time. Thanks again! Electric Japan (talk) 14:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I have now provided the information required. How do I remove the template?

Thanks, Electric Japan (talk) 14:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I am trying hard to follow the rules on Wikipedia. It just takes so long to upload and get the correct templates. I am making an honest effort. Thanks, Electric Japan (talk) 14:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#User:J_Greb

--Skyelarke (talk) 19:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I deleted the message because I 'cooled off.' Actually, I also thought it sounded pretty silly too. Just came to the conclusion that, in the general scheme of things - war, famine, poverty etc - Wikipedia really isn't worth getting stressed about. Yes, your deletion decisions caused me no end of grief for 24 hours, but what is a day in a whole life?--Seahamlass (talk) 13:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I see from a perusal of the old Operation Rolling Thunder article that the images you tagged for deletion are now gone. Even after I gave you complete attributions for all of them. Oh well, I guess the article really is better off without them. Let me make a suggestion. Go to my user page and take all 14 other A-Class articles and delete all of the images, which, by the way have no better attributions than the ones I gave you for Rolling Thunder. I'm sure the readers of Wiki would extol yer perceptiveness in all things attributable. As a matter of fact, I may beat you to the punch and delete them myself. I'll give you a week. After all, I have hard copy of all of the articles and pictures, and my publisher has been calling. Well, good luck in your future in the world of the Wikiverse.RM Gillespie (talk) 18:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't stop now, what you don't do, I'll do myself. FIGMO. RM Gillespie (talk) 18:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC) .

I know, the pics aren't up to code, it's ok, just do your thing. Speciate (talk) 13:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm in general, not happy about the situation either. But, I don't think an RFC would solve anything. Enforcing image policy is like banging your head against a brick wall. Sorry. Megapixie (talk) 09:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I originally did a B&W, Sepia and Color picture for the article on Sepia tone, to show the difference between sepia and black and white, also, because someone had used a Playboy playmate for a previous example, which would not qualify for fair use. Since then, someone else found a better picture (something nonspecific if I remember correctly) for sepia tone. This means that I no longer need the B&W or Sepia Images. As noted above, if you had marked them for deletion I would not need to do anything, but I see that - perhaps out of respect - you asked me first. If you have administrator priveleges or otherwise can delete photos, I have no problem with the deletion of the black and white and sepia images and you may do a speedy or immediate delete on those two. As you noted, I am still using the color image, so of course I would object to deletion of the color image (but as you said you were not raising an issue of the color image I presumed you were not planning to do so anyway, but when it comes to something as permanent as an erasure I tend to be anal retentive in being exact, if not pedantically so). Thank you for asking me. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 22:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I didn't completely understand the instructions given. By the way, if I'm making a mistake by tagging these images let me know. Thanks.Shinerunner (talk) 02:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, You tagged Image:NDBalance.gif with the no source tag even though it clearly says "Source: U.S. Census Bureau" in the image description. Am I missing something here? Kaldari (talk) 16:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. That is not a sufficient source. Did you get it from a website? A publication that you scanned? Saying you got it from the "US Census" is like saying you got a burger from McDonald's. It's very vague and can't be verified. Thank you for your understanding. MECU≈talk 17:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

It would be nice if you would state that on either my talk page notice, the image discussion page, or in the edit summary, rather than just using generic notices for something that is arguably not a violation of Wikipedia:Image use policy. In a situation such as this, I do not believe it is appropriate to simply stick a No Source tag on the image. Wikipedia:Image use policy states that the source is "the copyright holder of the image or URL of the web page the image came from". In this case I have listed the copyright holder of the image, the U.S. Census Bureau. If you would like a source that is easier to verify, you should state that, not queue the image for deletion. Nearly every person I know personally that has contributed images to Wikipedia has stated that they no longer have any desire to add image to the project because of the "image nazis". Please don't be so trigger happy to delete images. It is not a very collaborative way to improve Wikipedia. If an image's description requires clarification, let the uploader know that with a real message to their talk page, not just with a generic unfriendly template. Thanks! Kaldari (talk) 17:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think {{bsr}} would be a much better choice. There's no reason to threaten deletion for images that the Image use policy doesn't explicitly require us to delete. Even if we do want to delete those images, I think we should give more than a week's notice for images that at least have some sort of source information. Kaldari (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:NASA_bipropellant_Lrockth.gif&action=history

Congratulations, marking an in-use image for deletion because it has a NASA tag on it is easily the lamest thing I've ever seen anybody ever do in the wikipedia, by a very long way.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 17:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, regarding this: My problem isn't so much that he's "stealing" my work, which I really don't care about. My problem is disinformation using my work as its basis. It's pretty obvious that when someone clones a map and changes 3 or 4 countries without giving a source for their "new" information, then inserts the map onto a popular article in place or alongside the original map, that there's something up. I'll also point out that the user Cocoliras has repeatedly changed data regarding those same Latin American countries on the List of countries by percentage of population living in poverty article. I don't even mean just inserting new, unsourced info; he keeps changing the CIA and UN data to show those Latin American countries as half of what their poverty rates actually are. There is nothing helpful about allowing this user to keep the uploaded map when their intent is clearly to deceive, regardless of whether or not it complies with the copyright. Sbw01f (talk) 19:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the tip. Will do. Sbw01f (talk) 19:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I feel extremely antagonized when I get messages like yours. Please stop sending them. Lou Sander (talk) 21:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)