User talk:Cjmarsicano/Archive3

Talk page intro[edit]

Aaah! A clean slate - the sequel! Old archives are here (inception to 12.20.05) and here (12.20.05 to 2.2.06). Wipe your feet, make yourself at home, but don't take the Morning Musume CD's off of the stereo or I'll go GG Allin on your ass. ;) --CJ Marsicano 02:13, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:TLCinterview72605.ogg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:TLCinterview72605.ogg, 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.

Matt 18:25, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IfD is the place where members of the community discuss whether a particular media file should be kept or deleted. I encourage you to explain there why you think that this file is fair use, but unlisting the file without letting everyone have their say is not a way of achieving concensus. It's important for the notice to remain on the file so that other people know that the file is listed for deletion and can have their say as well. Also, striking out someone elses comments is frowned upon here. Thank you for your cooperation. Matt 02:50, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Draw McGraw[edit]

Your additions regarding the wrestling move El Kabong on the Quick Draw McGraw page should probably be moved to Professional wrestling attacks#El Kabong. The paragraph about the wrestling move is longer on the page about the cartoon character then on the wrestling moves page! Qutezuce 02:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copying from wiki.theppn.org[edit]

The licenses between wiki.theppn.org and Wikipedia are incompatible. You can't copy from one and paste it into the other. In the future please reword and cite it as a source. --Sanchny 17:00, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking opinion[edit]

Hey dude, did a bit of work on the Osaka Koi no Uta single page, and I think I've finally come up with the standard (tracklisting, charts, members ect.) for Momusu/H!P singles to use. I did the mentioned single as an example, and if you think it is ok or have any other suggestions on what to include, I'm gonna start doing the rest of the singles and use the same example from now on for H!P related stuffs. For the charts, I don't think we need to be as extreme as wiki.theppn with the charts, just the peak position will do. Let me know what you think. --Sploggers 06:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thank you for signing my manifesto. Direct and comments, questions or concerns to my talk page or the manifesto's talk page. Thanks again. The Ungovernable Force 08:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes[edit]

Improv has just done a mass deletion of userboxes. ArbCom much? --Shell <e> 05:35, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I gave him 12 hours to restore the userboxes. --

Shell <e> 05:42, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cjmarsicano/UDUIW[edit]

Please see my comment on the talk of the CSD page for my explanation. I think CSD T1 is being interpreted far too loosely, but in cases like this, I feel it is absolutely justified. Johnleemk | Talk 17:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What punishment? I haven't stopped beating my wife yet, if that's what you mean. I'm not out to punish anyone. I'm out to avoid m:factionalism, which harms both the community and the encyclopedia. Nothing done on Wikipedia is supposed to punish; it's supposed to aid the construction of an encyclopedia. Johnleemk | Talk 18:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the anti-Jimboism. I don't care whether you like, hate, trust or distrust Jimbo. It's the existence of a UDUIW userbox that is factionalism, because it serves to identify members of a particular faction in a uniform (and thus easily abused for factionalist purposes) manner. I would speedy any ADW or AIW or AMW or whatever factionalist userbox I see on sight. Johnleemk | Talk 18:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Raid[edit]

It appears as though all UDUIW activities are being "raided." That is, our logo was suggested for deletion as was our category. Do you have google talk or aim? I need to strategize. Also, the arbcom case was refused by 3 arbitrators. --Shell <e> 23:28, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't have either of those. Damn. Cjmarsicano 01:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I actually saw your aim sn and gmail address on your livejournal. --

Shell <e> 01:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxen[edit]

I have responded at Wikipedia talk:Userboxes, please continue all discussions there. --Cyde Weys 04:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving[edit]

I am leaving wikipedia (at least temporarily) because of this userbox dispute. I urge many people to do the same as I state in my userpage. --Shell <e> 06:01, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mazich01.jpg[edit]

I have removed your delete tag from the image and posted the following notice clarifying my position on Wikipedia's use of the image:

Notice from the photographer/copyright owner, 02:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC): I am the photographer and copyright owner of this photographic work, and I myself have uploaded the photograph to Wikipedia for the item in question. Obviously I am more than willing to allow the photograph to be used for any non-profit purpose by Wikipedia. I only ask for the following.

Proper copyright credit given. I already took care of that when I uploaded the photo.
A simple notification if this image is used for any other purpose (i.e., other than on this site) by Wikipedia, or by anyone else. If Wikipedia does their infamous DVD-ROM set or whatever, all they have to do is e-mail me at minimoniotaku@gmail.com -- there is a 99.99% possibility I will say yes anyway.

End of story. If anyone has any questions, they can e-mail me. My e-mail address obviously isn't hard to find. --CJ Marsicano 02:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC) (This message duplicated on the item's talk page and on the talk page of the person that tagged it for deletion.)[reply]

That's not good enough. Wikipedia requires user-created images to be uploaded under a free license such as the GFDL or a Creative Commons license, which basically means allowing three additional things in addition to the permissions you are granting:

The ability for entities other than Wikipedia to use the images.
The ability to use the images commercially. This permits Wikipedia to do things like sell CD-ROM versions of the encyclopedia to offset server costs, and it permits re-users like Answers.com to exist.
The ability to create derivative works.

See Wikipedia:Image use policy for more information on this. --Carnildo 02:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A not nice edit summary[edit]

It was quite rude of you to characterize my edit as vandalism. Be warned: The THOUGHT POLICE are watching you. :) In all seriousness, could you please consider making your user page look a bit more professional? Every time you edit an article you attach a link to your userpage to its history... What is a reader to think if they checkout the editors of an article only to find someone with a userpage laden with POV and bias? --Gmaxwell 06:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

replied--Gmaxwell 07:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sakura & Otome gumi: Singles or EPs?[edit]

(as discussed here)
To quote the article on singles:
"In music, a single is a short record, usually featuring one or two tracks as A-side, often accompanied by several B-sides, usually remixes or other songs."
and the article on EPs: "An extended play or EP, is the name given to vinyl records or CDs which are too long to be called singles but too short to qualify as albums. Typically an album has eight or more tracks (anywhere between 30-60 minutes), a single has one to three (5-15 minutes), and an EP four to eight (or around 15-30 minutes)."
Also, in Japan EPs often haven titles of their own. — Chsf 18:50, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:TLCinterview72605.ogg)[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:TLCinterview72605.ogg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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. Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 02:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Dos02a.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dos02a.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 23:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Dos 1996.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dos 1996.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

I'm back[edit]

I'm back =D. The religion userboxes were restored and I am HAPPY. Made a bunch of edits today too --Shell <e> 01:28, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minutemen page[edit]

I noticed that there seems to be an incomplete edit on the Minutemen page -- there is an incomplete phrase in the "Covers and Tributes" section, third paragraph -- "specifically the". I'm assuming you're still working on editing, but if I don't notice a change by the end of the day, I'll probably go ahead and delete the phrase.--Larrybob 21:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

Hey man, long time no talk, lets have some beer =)

Shell <e> 15:17, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Wattforwikipedia.jpg[edit]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Wattforwikipedia.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Please consider releasing this image under a free license or it will most likely have to be deleted. -SCEhard T 03:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:2nd W.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:2nd W.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. ReyBrujo 00:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 2nd W album cover.[edit]

Hello! I was wondering if you could find the URL from where you picked the image. I tagged it as lacking a source, not a license. That is, if you have downloaded it from another site, it is necessary to add the source (I suggest two links, one to the page holding the image, and a direct link to the image) to acknowledge the fourth guideline of Fair Use (The material must have previously been published.). If you can't, it should be necessary to find another image that can be sourced instead. -- ReyBrujo 01:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May userbox policy poll[edit]

Hi. You're a supporter of userboxes, and there's currently a policy poll going on about userboxes that might solve the speedy deletion issue. I encourage you to vote if you haven't already. Thank you. Dtm142 21:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Project[edit]

I'm well aware that there were wholesale changes to category:Singles, because I initiated them. My changes today were for two reasons: One, that category:Japanese singles is going away, and I wanted all songs categorized by artist when they moved into category:Japanese songs. Now they are, rather than cluttering up category:Japanese singles. The second is that many of the articles have the shouting all-caps form, which is expressly against Wikipedia style; see the discussion at Talk:J-pop#use of all-caps. By all means, if you have reasons to move articles from one category to another, do so. But please be aware that category:Japanese singles shouldn't be filled with songs that will be in subcategories of category:Japanese songs. Please consider this as you approach whether to revert any of my edits.--Mike Selinker 00:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are putting songs back in album categories. Why?--Mike Selinker 01:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've put a notice onto Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs#J-pop songs about the capitalization of J-pop singles. Please register an opinion there so that this can be evaluated. Thanks!--Mike Selinker 15:27, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jandek album covers[edit]

Hey, thanks for putting the album covers back up. I had a talk with Taw about it, and he wrote:

First thing, it's now easy to undelete deleted images. I haven't done any mass deletions before we got this feature. So if any image is actually contributing significantly to the articles, it can be undeleted by any admin in just a few clicks.

Second, Wikipedia fair use policy which has been a compromise between pro-fair-use and everything-has-to-be-free factions puts very high standards of when fair use images are appropriate:

The material must contribute significantly to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text) and must not serve a purely decorative purpose.

Because in the past fair use CD/DVD covers have been uploaded just for decoration, in spite of Wikipedia policies, I'm all for deleting all of them en masse right now, and selectively undeleting only those that actually significantly contribute to articles. One cover actually contains a photo of Jandek (as used in article Jandek), and I have nothing against using that one. But most of them seem to be simply a decoration

Now I find your claim that Jandek's album covers are somehow significant rather dubious, as there isn't a single word about significance of the covers in Jandek article. If the covers are actually significant, something would be written about that in the article.

Enjoy :-) Taw 13:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know. Thanks. --Leo44 (talk) 11:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tsuji the record holder.[edit]

I've made a minor adjustment - removed "Both" from the start of the sentence 'Kago and Tsuji are also known as "Two Top"'.

My main query is about the Hula Hoop paragraph. I'm pretty sure that the Bakajo test achievement has been stuck in the middle of the Hula Hoop talk making it appear, due to the sentence that follows it, that Tsuji and Kago regained the record of being Bakajo. I've moved that Bakajo bit to the end of the paragraph, after the Futsal information as it's a humourous, slightly perjorative note that adds a bit of levity to her achievements.

Hope that's all groovy.

Free beer[edit]

I've been long for a long time and didn't want to return either, but some people are nice - like you. Anyway, I've won a huge fight, because it was the thing which needed to be done. So I hope you'll enjoy your free beer and not just any beer: Have of bottle of Chimay Bleue Grande Réserve Millésime 1999 Vintage Magnum :D KittenKlub 13:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Monty Python TfD compromise[edit]

There is a compromise now posted on the TfD if you are still interested in this debate. One question, even though you are against this TfD, have you even taken the master template out for a test drive?
Lady Aleena talk/contribs 08:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current mac project collaboration[edit]

The current WP:MAC collaboration is Apple II family. Please devote some time to improve this article to featured status. — Wackymacs 13:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, my mistake. Wi-king 04:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox album modification[edit]

Hi! I noticed you added some greatest hits combinations to {{Infobox Album/color}}. I appreciate them, however the idea is to eliminate keys from that template until there is only one available type per every type of album, not to add them. The current discussion can be held either at the talk page of that template, or at the WikiProject Album page. -- ReyBrujo 04:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CfD UDUIW[edit]

You should be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion#Category:Users_in_Defense_of_Userboxes_and_Individuality_on_Wikipedia_.28UDUIW.29. --NThurston 20:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cOULD yOU hELP mE![edit]

Could you possibly help my with my article on Ed Crawford. It is still in the works right now and I'm not sure if there is much else I can do. I figure you could help since you're now Mike Watt's errand boy (You lucky son of a gun). this isn't an order just a suggestion. --Adamv88 22:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Panic at the disco[edit]

I have semi-protected the page according to your request on WP:RFPP. I have also left a note to other administrators that un-protection is not recommended. Thatnk you for taking the time to make your request. Best regards, RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 14:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Halo2nutter[edit]

Hi. I just thought I'd let you know that it's generally not a good idea make ban threats at new users. Halo2nutter only made that one edit, and expecting him to know the vandalism policy is ridiculous. -- Selmo ^(talk) 02:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Vandalism happans everywhere. Lucky for us, we have the Counter-Vandalisn Unit, who usually revert vandalism in a matter of seconds. -- Selmo ^(talk) 02:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: From Infobox Idol to Infobox Musical Artist[edit]

Hello there. It was not my intention to fix those infoboxes, nor I have time to do that. I replaced them for two reasons: first, it is better to show a minimun infobox (one or two line, as my "fix" did) than to show a red link, and second, because showing the red link may make any editor go there and delete the template with all the information. I should have added in my edit summary a sentence like "Please someone fix this template", true, for which I apologize. However, as I just stated, I do not have time to do that now, so if you can, it will be appreciated, and if not, someone else will have to do it. -- ReyBrujo 16:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should be free for around 30 minutes in a couple of hours. That should be enough to fix most of the infoboxes. Also, regarding the photos, they already qualify as fair use replaceable images, and could be tagged anytime with {{replaceable fair use}} or {{fair use replace}} tags, so the fact that they stay orphan is not an immediate issue. I would also suggest you to cool down, your second post was much more welcomed than your first one. Regards. -- ReyBrujo 16:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Watt-in-the-studio-040216.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Watt-in-the-studio-040216.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:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
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 ☠ 18:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More replaceable fair use images[edit]

—Chowbok ☠ 16:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image permission[edit]

Unfortunately, "permission to use on Wikipedia" is not sufficient for our purposes. We need the image to be licensed in such a way that anybody can copy the image for any reason, including commercial, without having to ask permission. The easiest way to ensure that is to have the image released under the license terms of the GFDL, the Creative Commons Attribution or Attribution-ShareAlike licenses, or to simply renounce all copyright to the image. If you can get an e-mail from Mr. Watt stating that he understands this and is willing to do it for this image, then we can use it with no problems. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Thanks! —Chowbok ☠ 00:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use tag[edit]

Even if you disagree with its application, please do not remove the "replaceable fair use" tag. Please follow the instructions included therein for disputing it. Thanks. —Chowbok ☠ 03:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note[edit]

Thanks for your note. I do understand your concerns, but I believe the long-term goal of having a freely-redistributable encyclopedia outweighs the short-term problem of having less images. I do appreciate that your comments are meant in good faith, and a helpful manner, but I could just as easily turn them around and post them to you: "The more fair-use images you upload, the more harm you do to Wikipedia by taking us that much farther away from having a free encyclopedia. I suggest you step back until you understand this better."

Actually, I only really believe the first sentence in that "quote". When there's a good-faith disagreement about Wikipedia policies and goals, I think engagement and discussion is the best course. Asking somebody else to go away until they see it my way is counterproductive, IMO.

Wishing you all the best. —Chowbok ☠ 05:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused that you keep mentioning attribution issues, because I don't think I've ever said anything about that (have I? Correct me if I'm wrong). I do feel those images are replaceable; I'm sorry this angers you, and that's not my intent. I would be happy to discuss my reasoning with you anytime. —Chowbok ☠ 06:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're quoted in the Washington Post[edit]

This article [1]. Near the bottom of the first page. Vizjim 15:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno - what if Kim Eternity had seen your name? :0 Vizjim 20:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Song articles[edit]

Please see Talk:W (Double You). --WikiSlasher 02:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Triplethreat darkness.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Triplethreat darkness.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Countrymusume.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Countrymusume.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

WikiProject Hello! Project Userbox[edit]

I just made a userbox for WP:H!P so if you want to put it on your user page, it's {{User WikiProject Hello! Project}}. If not, you should still add

[[Category:WikiProject Hello! Project participants|{{subst:PAGENAME}}]]

to your user page so your name can be added to Category:WikiProject Hello! Project participants.

A funny thing is that I just uploaded the other picture of Aika Mitsui from KAKKO-II and right when I put it on her page, it was in conflict with your edit. I guess you're just a lot faster than me. I'll just have to delete mine now. --Chuckle berry 06:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Project photo template[edit]

I've been updating Chisato Moritaka's profile here on Wiki and think it'd be great if you could perhaps enlarge the scope of said template so that it could also be used by other artists affiliated with Up-Front Works but not Hello! Project per se. Thanks for your cooperation --Ishikawa Minoru 00:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Berryz Koubou.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Berryz Koubou.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

List of premature obituaries[edit]

Do you have a source for the Harley Race entry you added to this article? I couldn't easily find one from a bit of Google searching, but you will know better than me where the information came from. The article is currently being considered for becoming a Featured List so I am trying to add a reference for every entry; hence your help on this point would be much appreciated. Thanks! Ben Finn 01:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Ben Finn 14:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toberman House[edit]

Hey, I noticed this redlink at the bottom of Dos (band) and thought I'd see if I could encourage you to write something about it. Cheers, Pete.Hurd 06:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Created a stub. Rock on, Pete.Hurd 15:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Aika_02.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Aika_02.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
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.

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Aibonkago.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Aibonkago.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

No content in Category:WWE Records albums[edit]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:WWE Records albums, by 84.66.17.239, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:WWE Records albums has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:WWE Records albums, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:WWE Records albums itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 22:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SST chronology[edit]

I can't believe the powers that be are trying to undo all your hard work on the SST catalog chronology. Such bullshit. Adamv88 22:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown Instructors quoting Double Nickels on the Dime[edit]

My issue with this statement is the "interpolating" bit. If it's not a direct quote, which you could cite using written copies of the lyrics, then conjecturing the quote would constitute original research. Also, Wikipedia pages aren't valid citations. Hope that makes sense; still waking up. Feel free to discuss this more on my talk page. --Gimme danger 15:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Cool, I only knew the mathematical definition of interpolate before. But anyway, if you could find a lyric sheet somewhere that would be a citation. After a bit of digging at Wikipedia:Reliable sources, it seems like the songs themselves could be cited for this. I can do this, but you seem to be the expert in this case. --Gimme danger 15:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kago_Ai_2006.jpg[edit]

I have tagged Image:Kago_Ai_2006.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Abu badali ^(talk) 03:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Kago Ai 2006.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Kago Ai 2006.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 07:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images on articles helmed by WP:H!P[edit]

This is really getting annoying, but I have to butt in and put a kibosh or at least a serious slowdown on what you're doing somehow.

Your actions are damaging the integrity of articles that Wikipedia:WikiProject Hello! Project have been supervising/editing/writing/trying to improve. I am very dismayed that you are just flat out removing images without making an effort to help actually improve the articles. This is not the first time we had to dispute your "endeavors", especially in the case of the photo in question. This is one of the reasons why, yes, I detaggified your handiwork.

At WP:H!P we fully endeavor to fully attribute and rationalize the images we use for the articles we monitor, edit, and create, and whenever we can we try to make them low resolution enough so that they don't look like shit and thus do justice to both the article and to Wikipedia protocol. Hello! Project artists are unfortunately the most unaccessible to the public as far as obtaining "free" images of the personalities involved. There have been no successful efforts to obtain so-called "free" images.

WP:H!P is run and maintained by non-Japanese fans in the United States and other places in the Western world. Hello! Project and their agency, Up-Front Works, have not made any inroads (yet) to bringing their artists to the US to perform, with the sole exception of Hawaii (as far as I know, none of the American residents who are part of WP:H!P where Up-Front Works often flies members of H!P's Japanese fan club to perform in private concerts there, and the same restrictions on cameras coming into the shows in Japan are used at these shows too.

I am not going to tolerate this any further, especially since you acting in bad faith by removing images without contacting some of the contributors who uploaded them (it seems like you've missed a few - bad boy!) and/or locating or offering solid proof that so-called "free" images for the articles in question exist. I have had a look at your user contribution history. I have had a look at your user contribution history and excuse the way I put this, but from my point of view, all it seems like you are contributing is loosely sanctioned vandalism. In other words, you mght have good intentions, but unfortunately they aren't that good at all. It clearly states in all photographs that we have uploaded (or had to defend) in recent instances that no free alternatives are available to us (or anyone else). If you can prove that so-called "free" images exist for the artists in question, do a little Googling for yourself and try to prove it! Believe me, we've looked ourselves and come up with nothing.

if the problem is with the size of the pictures and/or the presence of Up-Front Works' copyright on the photos - photos that Up-Front Works gives away to fans. for Christ's sake - then that could be easily solved by asking the uploader or one of the folks at WP:H!P to take a couple of minutes with Photoshop and rectify the problem without bringing in the copyright nazis and the Wikipedia firing squad - or to put it mildly, ASK US NICELY WITHOUT GOING TAG CRAZY. All of us in WP:H!P are devoted fans but we are also human beings with the usual responsibilities.

Again, we at WP:H!P do our damndest to bend over backwards to meet Wikipedia standards for pictures, especially with attribution and rationalization. I feel that in part, we who do bend over backwards to stay within boundaries are being punished along with those that don't know what the hell they're doing.

Please try to pull back the reins on removing so-called "non-free" images from articles maintained by WP:H!P - all you are doing is making our efforts harder than they already are and making what is essentially a hobby for us less and less enjoyable, which would then have an even bigger negative impact on Wikipedia as a whole. --CJ Marsicano 03:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Going directly to the points:

Never say an editor is acting in bad faith.
Although most of contributors are currently from USA, there are Wikipedians in Japan.
1. There are also Flickers in Japan.
2. Specially, there are a huge number of members of general audience with photo-cameras in Japan.
When did I didn't warned the uploader when tagging an image for deletion? I believe I haven't fail to do that in months.
Never call fellow Wikipedians "copyright nazis" ([2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]...). This doesn't help your argument.

Please cool down, keep calm, and engage in civil conversation. I'll be happy to explain any doubts or misunderstandings you may have regarding our policies. Best regards, --Abu badali ^(talk) 20:01, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish there was a way to get "free images" for all the H!P members. Without images, some people would not know what the person looks like. People want to know who they look like. I'm sure you all know wiki.theppn, I think that is a great resource too, and it's got pictures. But in this case here, i'd be willing to help out with this problem. Momusufan 01:13, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The following is what I posted at the talk page of WP:H!P

It is expressly forbidden by the policy of the English Wikipedia and the Wikimedia foundation to use non-free (fair use) images solely to illustrate what a living person looks like. Per Wikipedia:Non-free content#Examples of unacceptable use, "An image of a living person that merely shows what s/he looks like [is unacceptable use under non-free content policy]. The rationale is that this is potentially replaceable with a freshly produced free photograph." There are no if's, and's, or but's to this policy. The statement that was on this WikiProject's page that stated "Free images sadly do not exist for H!P artists so anyone involved with this WikiProject should endeavor to both properly attribute and rationalize these items and defend them from those that are (intentionally or not) destroying much of the hard work we are doing here" is completely false and against all Wikimedia policies. If you can't find a free image of someone, then you cannot have an image of that person on the article at all. This covers all living persons, so we are not just cracking down on your WikiProject.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 22:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Free photos don't seem like a possible solution because the photos taken by the idols of themselves seem to be automatically placed under the copyright of their agency as seen on one of their blogs here. I have one question. Would free artwork, such as drawings of them be allowed? ☆Charles Nguyễn 23:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Drawings of individuals are generally something one should not use. If it's like fanart, then it's still a derivative work of something that is very llikely copyrighted.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 00:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the fair use policies have been in place since 2004, and have been enforced since then. If you cannot find a free picture of a living individual, fair use images of that individual are not to be used just to depict the individual. Fair use law requires critical commentary on the image and not solely the individual in the image.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 00:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And, Cjmarsicano, you seem to have major ownership issues with WP:H!P. There are no "moderators" of WikiProjects. They are not message boards, nor is Wikipedia. Please calm down and try and find free images, or request them from their talent agencies, or request them from the articles' subjects themselves. Fair use images of living people will not work.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 00:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I happened by sheer coincidence to be looking through a list of disruptive users from a year or so ago, and this user was one of them so I clicked his contributions list and found his recent spam sent to 10 editors [9], which was highly unwikipedian, saying "This is your moderator speaking: Defend WP:H!P against Wiki's copyright nazis", and "with the copyright nazis breathing down our necks we have to defend the work we've been putting in", and "do not hesitate to defend against these pricks." This is of course completely unacceptable. I'm warning cjmarsicano that this behavior won't be tolerated. Continue in this vein and you will be blocked. --Tony Sidaway 21:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Momusu group photo[edit]

I'm not sure if this MM group photo could be used: --->[10] or this one --->[11] What do you think? Could they be classified as free images? Momusufan 01:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, those would be fair use images - which used to be OK in English Wikipedia and legal under the US Copyright Law's fair use clause. I don't know what the fuck happened lately but I don't fucking like it. --CJ Marsicano 01:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What suddenly happened was that Wikipedia:Fair use criteria was moved to Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria to make it more clear that Wikipedia uses copyrighted content much more strictly than regular fair use. In October 2006, the {{replaceable fair use}} came into play (October 2006 Signpost article), with an attempt three months later to eliminate all such promo images (January 2007 Signpost article). hbdragon88 04:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, tell Jimbo Wales and his misguided legal team that they have made what was once a hobby much less enjoyable for all involved, and have lessened, rather than improved, the integrity of Wikipedia. One way or another, this lame-ass policy has to be shitcanned. Sooner rather than later would be nice. --CJ Marsicano 15:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're the one whose complaining about the policy, so head on down to WP:JIMBO to inform him so. This is not a legal issue. This is part of the Wikimedia Foundation's drive to create a totally free cncyclopedia, and part of that is to eliminate as much non-free content as possible only except when totally necessary. hbdragon88 00:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This policy cannot be "shitcanned" as it prevents Wikipedia from lawsuits from the original copyright holders of the images. Right now, it's believed that any fair use image of a living individual can be easily replaced by a freely licensed photograph. You have to ask individuals more entrenched in the current non-free content policies if the subject of your WikiProject can be included as one of the rare exemptions.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 20:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The belief that a "free" picture exists to replace a so-called "non-free" image is a huge fallacy that will kill this website if heads are not pulled out of asses soon. And I'm willing to give those heads a much-needed yank. --CJ Marsicano 21:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A fair use image of a living individual used solely to depict what that individual looks like can be replaced by an image released under the GFDL or the Creative Commons, or even in the public domain. There are rare exceptions to this that you have found, but it is unlikely that anyone that the WikiProject you belong to covers would be exceptions. Any more disruption from you, including personal attacks, accusations of "copyright nazism," or further spamming to members of the WikiProject will lead to a block.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 21:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only disruptions that are being caused here are the ones being caused by one or two people telling a larger mass that they cannot communicate with other members of the Wikiprojects they are involved in, or use fair use clauses to their advantage. But if you want me to play by what are in my opinion really not-very-well-thought-out rules and regulations, that's fine. I'll gladly do that for now, because those weak alleged "rules and regulations" will eventually expose the current version of Wikipedia for the farce that it is. That is neither promise nor threat - just a prediction. --CJ Marsicano 01:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use does not cover photographs of living individuals at the English Wikipedia. There are rare exceptions, but it's very likely that Hello! Project is not an exception. That's it.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 01:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, fair use is the least of what makes Wikipedia a farce. Anybody can edit, trolling, vandalism, etc. are the big issue here, not fair use images. hbdragon88 01:36, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And meanwhile the trolls, vandals, and people who edit without registering are practically getting off scot-free while the more law-abiding participants of Wikipedia are getting fucked six ways to Sunday by the restrictive and ill-advised policies of this website. CJ Marsicano 01:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ryulong is an active WP:RCP editor. Abu badali is an active fair use checker. Some people just like to do different things. hbdragon88 01:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ryulong seems a little level-headed but doesn't (or doesn't seem to want to) understand Hello! Project or the complication WP:H!P faces with these "new rules". As for Abu badali, have you seen his RFC? Why the hell wasn't he banned and kept banned? More people seem to consider him a destructive, disruptive force - yet I'm the motherfucker that gets the shotgun jammed into his ribcage. The last time people tried to run things like this, it ended with a guy with a toothbrush mustache giving head to a handgun in an underground bunker. --CJ Marsicano 01:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The trolls, vandals, and anons are easily stopped. Now, I want you (CJ Marsicano) to stop. Stop telling people to e-mail you. You are not in charge of any WikiProject, as there are no hierarchies. Such groups with hierarchies have been eliminated on Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Esperanza and WP:AMA). Stop complaining about WP:NONFREE. You have to remember we're building a free encyclopedia here. Fair use images detract from that goal, and fair use images of living individuals are deemed replaceable unless there's evidence that states otherwise. If you contact Durin, he may be able to assist you here.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 01:48, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By "assist" I mean tell you if the Hello! Project people are "exceptions" in fair use photos.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 01:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I want to be in contact with the rest of WP:H!P, that is my right under the US Constitution and you cannot prevent that. If they all had an e-mail address linked to their user page I would not have to message them through their discussion boards. I'm not "canvassing" - that's a copout. It is also my right to "complain" against WP:NONFREE (what an appropriate name, now that I think of it) under that same US Constitution. Unless English Wikipedia's servers have all of a sudden been moved to a country with less free speech rights than the United States of America, that is.

Please read WP:CANVASS. "copyright nazis" is nowhere near nonpartisan, and you are only notifying "your side" of the issue, rather than both sides. You don't have any rights here, CJ. The servers may be hosted on Florida, but they are private and they can ban you if you want. You only have the right to free speech on public property; that is, they can't stop you from wearing a "Non-free content criteria sucks" in public, but they can do so in private. hbdragon88 02:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All I am trying to do is have a way to contact the rest of my fellow WP:H!P members so that we can discuss how we are going to be able to work around these (shitty) new guidelines in the immediate future. I'm not trying to stack votes or any of that other shit that is mentioned in the link you provided (thanks for that BTW).

Also BTW: If these servers are "private" why are they open to the public for wholesale editing? I've always felt that people should register with Wikipedia before being allowed to edit (which would greatly lighten the load for the Anti-Vandal Squad). That would make a lot of sense, then again, lately nothing is making a goddamned bit of sense on this website anymore. But like I said earlier, if you want me to play by these new, ridiculously restrictive rules, I will - but only until they bite Wikimedia in the ass, after which I will sit back and say, "I told you so." --CJ Marsicano 02:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Community is international. And the new policies have been made to help it. You're only problem right now is that the articles you work on are affected because fair use policy prevents you from making them look better with promotional photographs. I have tried to be diplomatic with you and trying to get you to understand the issue at hand. Because you have ignored me, I have blocked you for the next 48 hours, and I am bringing my block of you up for review at WP:AN. Please take this time to calm down and read over the relevant policies.—Řÿūłóñģ (竜龍) 02:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request[edit]

   * IP address: 70.18.64.120
   * Blocking admin: Ryulong
   * Block reason: Disruption, requests to stop ignored; full explanation to appear at WP:AN
   * Block originally applied to: Cjmarsicano
   * Your account name (if you have one): Cjmarsicano
   * An explanation of why your block is unfair: See my e-mail to Mr. Ryulong here for details. I feel that gross miscommunication between parties, and a serious misunderstanding of my attempt to communicate with other members of WP:H!P has led to this unnecessary attempt to prevent me from carrying on activites here.

Just so you know, this is not how you request unblock. You request unblock by putting {{unblock|Your reason here}} on your user talk page. What you copied over was the information you should send to unblock-en. Generally, requesting unblock using the template is faster. --Trumpetband ^WIHTW? 13:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apparently misunderstood the unblock directions. Kind of appropriate considering that the schmuck that blocked me for two days misunderstood all of my good faith intentions over the past weekend. But at least I didn't post that Nancy Benoit was dead 14 hours before the bodies were discovered! --CJ Marsicano 02:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tommyheavenly6.JPG[edit]

I have tagged Image:Tommyheavenly6.JPG as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Tommyheavenly6.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Tommyheavenly6.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 18:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu badali ^(talk) 18:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tommyheavenly6.JPG[edit]

Since pretty much everything else (copyright info, who took the photo [there wasn't a photo credit, so I had to put "Photographer unknown"], proper tag template) is there, I gave the precise source of the image... me, sort of. I scanned the image from a press kit for one of her recent records that I borrowed from a friend who collects that kind of stuff. Since I have provided the source of the picture, I have taken the liberty of removing the no-source tag from the image page. If there's any more questions, you know how to contact me. --CJ Marsicano 01:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The image seem replaceable. I have tagged it as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Abu badali ^(talk) 13:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image:Momusu live2007.jpg[edit]

Thanks for finding and moving the image. I am not completely sure if Wikimedia Commons will request some more information (the copyright owner wants to stay anonymous, limiting our way of determining a) if this person owns the copyright; b) if the user indeed accepted to release the image; c) if he indeed accepted to release it under that license), so there may be some further requests for clarification. I have added a {{NowCommons}} template, which will make an administrator delete the image at the English Wikipedia after some time passes (automatically passing to use the one in Commons). As for the difficulty of finding free images, that is related to the Japanese law about personality rights. There was a discussion about this matter at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Utada Hikaru Kanto 2004.jpg, where it was determined that, while the image may break some personality rights issues, the focus of Wikimedia Commons is to accept free images regardless of whether the image may break some law at some country. Note that these images are always controversial (a Japanese editor removed the image of Hikaru from the Japanese entry because of personality rights, while a Korean editor removed both Amuro Namie and Hamasaki images from their entries in the Korean Wikipedia for the same reason), so expect people to remove it, ask information about the copyright holder, or even nominate it for deletion. But well, law is usually interpreted in several ways depending on circumstances. Cheers! -- ReyBrujo 04:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Momusu live2007.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Momusu live2007.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.

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 22:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Siebrand 22:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Pennsylvania[edit]

Hello there!

I'm writing to inform you that we are now forming the first local Wikimedia Chapter in the United States: Wikimedia Pennsylvania. Our goals are to perform outreach and fundraising activities on behalf of the various Wikimedia projects. If you're interested in being a part of the chapter, or just want to know more, you can:

Contact us on IRC at #wikimedia-pa
Join our mailing list
Visit our blog at http://wmfpa.blogspot.com

Thanks and I hope you join up! Cbrown1023 talk 02:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kasumisou.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Kasumisou.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. Videmus Omnia 17:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]