Jump to content

User talk:Calliopejen1/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15

Bundy Image Removal

Collapsing to restart discussion - I didn't realize we were talking about two different Bundy photos... my bad.

You were Bold and then your bold edit was reverted. The next step is to discuss it. These images have been here through the GAN, and there's no deadline to remove them until they are deleted from the Commons. You people trying to eliminate these images are not even having the common courtesy to allow editors to contact the proper agencies who can hopefully clear this up. Please be patient: those of us who have worked very hard on this article for months and years are trying to be. But this is most likely where the FAC will be withdrawn. Doc talk 02:18, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Just one more thing: I notice that the license to File:Ted Bundy mug shot.jpg was changed to a PD one, assuming that it was a mug shot taken by an employee of the State of Florida and is therefore in the public domain. I wouldn't naturally assume that it's always the case: note the photo credit on this mug shot. For the Bundy photo in the infobox there is no photo credit for the same image (from the same agency).[1] Not that that necessarily means anything. Doc talk 03:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
I put them back because no one has made any credible argument that the photos are properly licensed. Whether or not the FAC gets withdrawn, I'm pretty sure the photos will be deleted eventually. I don't think this issue was addressed at all in the GAN. I'm not sure what your point is about the Casey Anthony photo--it's also PD-FLgov.[2] The work of any state employee (including people at the sheriff's office) is PD per the commons tag. Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:29, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
But it's credited to UPI Photo. The WP Casey Anthony photo does not even list a source, let alone a provable photo credit (which clearly does exist). Doc talk 03:34, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
The UPI photo credit is just because photo agencies can also distribute PD images from time to time (that's why it also notes that it was taken by the sheriff's office). Obviously this was taken by a state employee - it's a jail booking photo. Of course a commercial photo agency did not take her booking photo. Calliopejen1 (talk) 11:51, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
So you are contending that while UPI has a temporary right to credit the image as theirs, they have no permanent right to do so. Is this correct? Doc talk 11:57, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
No... this photo is public domain, so anyone can do whatever they want with it. I could distribute it to a paper if I wanted to, but that doesn't mean I own any rights to it. Struck "can" in my prior answer in case it was confusing. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:03, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
"Please fill out form for pricing information for the above image." Check the lower left corner under "License photo", directly across from "Enlarge Photo". UPI is not charging for this image? Really? Doc talk 12:12, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

They might be. It's public domain, they can do whatever they want. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:58, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

They are charging for its use. If it is public domain then they have no claim to the copyright, yet they are charging for its use. This is possibly also the case with some of the Florida Archive pictures. Do you see where I'm getting at? Doc talk 14:34, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Kind of.... But just because they're charging for its use does not show that it's copyrighted. I could charge for its use if I wanted. That's what public domain means--anyone can do whatever they want with the image. (On the other hand, someone would be stupid to pay UPI--or me--for a public domain image.) I agree that it's analogous to the Florida images in that it's yet another false claim of ownership. (Though UPI may never have even claimed to own it--their customers may just be paying because it's convenient, or because they don't know better.) UPI has no rights over this photo, just like the florida archives probably have no rights to many of the images in their collection. (Regardless of whether they possess physical copies of the images.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:39, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Someone would be doubly stupid to pay both UPI Note that the "wiki" link here links to our article: the irony is delicious ;> and Corbis for the exact same image if in fact it were already available under a share-alike license like what the Florida resource may or may not assert. Who really owns all the exclusive rights to that image? We've got to research it to find out. Doc talk 15:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
No one owns that image. It's public domain - see {{PD-FLgov}}. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
The image I linked to above certainly wasn't always in the public domain, as it was at one time credited to Wide World Photos. Now it is claimed simultaneously by UPI, Corbis and the state of Florida archives. I'm seeing a general confusion over whether an image is truly PD or CC A-2.0, with that discrepancy hinging on an image being "okay" for inclusion in the article. Am I in the right ballpark? Doc talk 06:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Not really. That image was always in the public domain. It was taken by a Florida state employee because all Florida booking photos are. (Clearly a commercial photo agency did not take this photo.) Any image taken by a Florida state employee is in the public domain, with limited exceptions that don't apply here (see the tag). Anyone can distribute a public domain image. That is why so many people are distributing it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC) Sorry I see where some of the confusion is. I assumed that the photos you were linking to were of the mugshot!! (Because that's what we had been talking about earlier.) Let me investigate more before I reply.
The behaviour of UPI and Corbis is not unusual, in that they're charging for something that is elsewhere available for free. To buy such a service suggests poor research beforehand, and selling such a service is perhaps opportunistic, but neither of these are legally actionable.
However you have now also accused the Florida State photo collection of making a fraudulent claim, by their claiming to be in a position to grant licences for use to materials where their copyright is held by another. That is a serious accusation to make of a library or archive. It might even be considered to be a libelous statement about them. Do you have any evidence to back that up? It is a very different situation to UPI, both in the background to it, and in the severity of your accusation. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Huh? I was just trying to simplify things here so that you understood me. I'm not accusing them of fraud, just saying the template should be deleted. It's not even clear that the archive has ever claimed it owns the rights to these images. The email is confused and only says is that Wikipedia can use them and that it's not a copyright problem. That could equally be a statement that the archive won't take action against wikipedia, or that the archive thinks Wikipedia is okay under the fair use doctrine. Or the random employee that responded to that email could be confused. That has happened often. If you really think the archive owns the rights to this collection, I'd recommend emailing them and getting someone in an obvious position of authority to confirm--explicitly--that they own the copyrights to the photos. So far, I don't see any statement to that effect. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Casey Anthony mugshot

That is {{PD-FLGov}} because it was taken by a Florida state employee. The credit here does not indicate otherwise - the paper is just distributing a public domain image, which is totally permissible and happens all the time. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Ted Bundy mugshot (Florida)

That is {{PD-FLGov}} because it was taken by a Florida state employee. Because it is public domain, the "permission" from the florida archives is meaningless - anyone can already do whatever they want without abiding by the archives' wishes - that's what public domain means. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Ted Bundy 7/28/1978 photo

Everything is copyrighted by default - we need a specific reason to think that this image is public domain and/or freely licensed. The full(er?) image shows him being sworn in in court.[3] I've never heard of state government employees serving as photographers in courtrooms, though the article makes clear that there were tons of reporters there. (Which suggests that some newspaper or image agency would own the copyright.) The Corbis image page doesn't really give us any clues to the copyright status, because Corbis credits it to the Bettman collection, which includes at least some public domain images (images from the 19th century are PD). It's not crazy that UPI is also licensing this photo[4] - if the image is copyrighted, maybe UPI has an agreement with Corbis or an agreement with the photographer (many contractual arrangements could allow for this). If the image is free, of course two different agencies could be distributing it. So really all we have here is a default rule that it's copyrighted and common sense telling us it was taking by a commercial news photographer. We have no particular reason to think that the Florida Archives own the copyright to this image. And if the Florida Archives don't own the copyright, then their permission is meaningless. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

S&M

Was your copy-editing on the S&M article to do with the FAC? Calvin • 999 14:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

More or less... I saw it there at FAC, and I went to check it out. It's pretty discouraging that you undid the whole thing instead of assessing individual changes. I think the prose is at a very amateur level (nowhere near FA level), so I was trying to help out. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I wasn't to know that what you had done was copyediting for FAC, because you hadn't stated that you had made those changes on the FAC talk page. I was getting confused because the reviewers are telling me to do something, then I'd go to change it, and I couldn't find what it was that they wanted changed, so I couldn't tell them that it has been done. I'm not saying I don't appreciate your help, but a lot of what you had removed hadn't been listed as things that needed to be removed on the FAC talk page, meaning that they clearly think it is fine as it is, and was also information which I was told to include during the GAN process; thus you was removing content which made it a GA in the first place, such as in the lead. I prefer to do things myself, so I know what's been done and what needs to be done so i can keep track of things, and I kinda feel like it is my responsibility to make the changes considering I nominated it, that's just my opinion. And I did assess each of your edits, I looked at them all, but it was easier for me to undo all of them so I could start from where I left off. Don't take this offensively! Calvin • 999 15:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
The prose needs a huge overhaul. The other reviewer left some minor suggestions but IMO it needs basically a rewrite with much of the same info (but some details of limited value removed) before it can be FA. I was hoping to help, but it sounds like there are some ownership issues, and I don't care that much. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:40, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
That's fine, but it would have been helpful to see what you had edited on the talk page so I knew. And I really disagree with the ownership thing. I don't expect to just sit here and do nothing and expect everyone to do everything for me, I am just very dedicated to what I am involved in and like to see things through from start to finish, surely you see what I mean? Of course anyone can edit the article, but I just think it's helpful to say in the edit summaries that it was for FAC and to write on the talk page what you had addressed. I've tried explaining myself and my actions which I think are valid, but if you don't care, then there's nothing else I can say. Calvin • 999 15:47, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Whether it was for FAC was irrelevant. I copyedited the article to improve the prose quality, which would have been a good thing irrespective of the FA nom. It was clear from my edit summary that I was copyediting. If I was going to explain every place where the prose was awkward it would have taken hours. As it was, I spent a long time doing that editing. I didn't want to leave a very negative comment on the FAC page, so I figured I'd just try to work on the prose before other reviewers got around to looking at the article. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and for you to just revert all my edits wholesale is basically the definition of page ownership. It would be way too hard for me to suggest changes individually for you to implement because it needs a huge overhaul by a skilled editor. My point about not caring is that I tried to be helpful, and you just reverted everything I had done. If you want my help, I'm happy to offer it, but this is not my area of interest -- I was just trying to be nice. If you don't want my help, I won't help -- I have nothing invested in that article. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
It is relevant, because for all I knew you was just some random editor making unnecessary changes, which lets face it, loads of editors do. Feel free to copy and paste those edits back in, just as long as they don't conflict with what I have changed per FAC, but some of your edits, like the removal of the live performance info in the Lead, I didn't agree with. And I did provide an explanation in my revert edit summary, and if you'll notice, I did say "good faith". I never said you weren't trying to be nice, and I did say above that I appreciate your help, but I don't know what else I can say. Calvin • 999 15:59, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm not going to make my edits all over again - if you want them, you can reenter them. (It's not my fault you removed them!) In the future please don't assume that contributors to articles you are working on are "random editors making unnecessary changes." (Also, "for all I knew" - if you had questions, you could have glanced at my userpage which would have told you that that was unlikely to be the case.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:35, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
But then it's not listed that you made the edits? I don't have a problem with what you changed, it's just that it made it difficult for me to see what had and hadn't been addressed because I couldn't find some things. I don't want any hard feeling. Calvin • 999 16:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't want hard feelings either... I don't need to be credited for those edits - you can feel free to put them back yourself. As for the stuff I removed, I didn't take out much. I removed the live performance stuff from the intro because I found it to be a somewhat boring list. Of all the things I took out, this I think would be the most justified for you to put back in. Maybe instead just highlight the premiere instead of the other performances to avoid it being list-y. The Today show sentence was awkwardly long and got into uninteresting detail. I condensed the Britney/Rihanna stuff because now, looking back, we don't need a blow-by-blow of the twitter exchanges - it's not interesting to the reader because we know how it comes out in the end. I also cut the Britney quote to the most relevant parts and took out some offhand comment about the music video because it never happened and it's just not that important that Rihanna once said it would be cool to make a music video. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Calvin • 999 16:54, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I have added 95% of your edits back in, I re-worded one or two things, and decided not to completely remove a few other things from the article, as I feel they are necessary to keep. Thanks. Calvin • 999 19:35, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: S&M source

The source did not claim that the clip was banned, but rather that it was "censored" in 11 countries. Only in China, Malaysia, and Indonesia that the clip was entirely banned. DHN (talk) 10:42, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Francisco de Zurbarán

Thanks for getting it done. Srnec (talk) 03:17, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I didn't do much yet! I was going to translate more of the Spanish and/or French versions of the article, but there are a lot of inconsistencies between the different-language versions. And what look like the best sources aren't available online. So for now I think I'm going to hold off... He's one of my favorite painters, so hopefully I can improve his article eventually. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Template:Campaignbox Spanish Civil War

Can you copy the infobox from Spanish wiki and update and I will fill in the missing links like Asturias Campaign, Bombing of Jaén etc?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Awesome thanks! Busy creating geography categories for each Spanish province right now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Very stubby but I'd have given up on the task otherwise. Besides with expansions like this things are looking up.. Needs a copyedit and proof read though and a number of capital letters needed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:27, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Attribution requirements

Please see my reply at FPC, is acceptable now? or should I remove the whole thing?   ■ MMXX  talk  19:17, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the suggested attribution for now, until I could think of a better way. if I remember correctly, the issue of attributing images used in Wikipedia articles has been raised before somewhere, I remember some people were saying that name of authors should be showed in the article, but currently as it's agreed, only way that viewers can see the authors name is by clicking on images, that's why I believe providing a link to the image is the best way of attributing the works, but perhaps for printed media that's not the best idea, yet it is useful and effectual, please continue the discussion here because I don't like the FPC get full of comments and no votes also I would like to know your opinion about the FP candidate itself, if it is possible. thank you.   ■ MMXX  talk  20:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes, there has been some debate over adding image credits on the image page - that's a sort of related issue about how to implement credits in a reasonable way. I suppose in certain cases it might be reasonable to have a link, if--say--that's how the website did it typically. But maybe a link wouldn't be reasonable where the website credits other photo authors by name... I'm kind of neutral about the photomontage - there are some places where I thought the cutouts could be done better, but I didn't think it's worth opposing over. And now I'm not seeing the problems when I open it again... I'll have another look in a bit and add a vote. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Great, thank you, please check the alternative version, I did some fixes to the alt version, but not the original.   ■ MMXX  talk  13:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
About the attribution, if someone wants to use this work in a printed media, in video or TV, what is the best way of attribution in your opinion? considering that they might not be able to list all the names of works and authors.   ■ MMXX  talk  13:30, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

Wikipedia:Peer review/The Emancipation of Mimi/archive1

Hi Jen :) How have you been my friend? So I've nominated this article for PR, because I'm really looking for that star this time lol. I've gotten all the source issues covered, yet now come the prose. Can you take a look and give me some feedback? Sarastro already gave loads of tips, but I need advice in terms of who can help me achieve these prose. The guild? Maybe some other course of action that I'm not aware of can be taken? I think the prose are pretty good, but at FAC they like clear and concise, and IMO "lifeless: lol. Any ideas and/or suggestions? :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your work thus far! It is very much appreciated :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 02:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi Jen. Not to sound selfish or pressuring at all, just simply wondering. Will you get around to the rest? Or have you done what you can? Thanks anyway :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi! I'll try to work on it a bit more later - I was hoping to go through the whole thing eventually, but there's only so much Mariah Carey I can take at once! Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Haha don't worry :) Take all the time you need, literally! Mimi appreciated you ;)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 18:28, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Hey Jen :) Do you know how to remove watermarks? [File:Shake it off33.jpg This] photo I uploaded has black logo on the corner, without cropping (or else nevermind) can you remove it? Also, please don't reduce it or crop, I'm going to do that after. A million Thanks :-D--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 17:01, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Aapchaur

Check it out and Nepal on Google Earth. Unbelievable.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Is there a category for Modelling agencies or fashion in New York or something? I've created Zoli Agency.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:36, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

ARKive

Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia:GLAM/ARKive - keep up the good work! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Your Article

The article you created Star cactus, has already been created.

See Astrophytum asterias. Its the same thing just that it uses the scientific name. This is against wikipedia rules, so please delete your article as it is newer, allow me to use the db-a10 or db-same deletion templates on it. You can edit Astrophytum asterias with the info on your page to add anything it Astrophytum asterias lacks. Thankyou. Zenithfel (talk) 22:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I just realized this - that's why I added the merge tags. (More sensible next step than deletion.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:52, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
My fault for suggesting at the Wikipedia:GLAM/ARKive project that it should be a new article. I've merge them and redirected the new creation. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

FAOL

Given that a number of people spent a lot of time on WP:FAOL it's quite disappointing to see "this project was an ill-conceived mess. please discuss at WP:TRANSLATION before re-starting indiscriminate tagging" and "the process proposed here is not really helpful. redirecting". Please point me to the discussion where it was decided to remove all of this and where reasons why it is so bad are noted. violet/riga [talk] 21:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Further: You may wish to go through all of the double redirects that have now been caused, or more appropriately MFD the page. violet/riga [talk] 22:24, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

The discussion for deleting the indiscriminately-applied tags is here. I don't have an issue with the idea generally, but all these lists of articles were drawn up ages ago, and generally are totally useless. Please un-redirect any list you find with mainly valid translation requests. I just don't think these lists are useful in the least - it would be better to start from scratch by looking at what's currently featured (many have been delisted and many of the newly listed ones are higher quality). The double redirects will be fixed by a bot, so that's not an issue. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:52, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
As you say the discussion was about the templates and not the page. It does have potential and is a good idea (perhaps in a modified form) so it's quite objectionable to see it described as an "ill-conceived mess". violet/riga [talk] 00:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
The point of the project was to tag every article as step one. That was surely an ill-conceived mess. The idea of translating is a good one, but that's not a sensible way to go about it at all. The project basically only got as far as applying the useless tags. I don't think translating high-quality content is a bad idea in the least, but those lists are not useful. And anyways I think redirecting is the best course, to centralize all the various dead translation projects into one place to at least point everyone in the same direction if they're interested in reviving some sort of collaboration. Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
It doesn't really seem that different to {{tl:expand language}} so maybe you're just removing something that already did what you have tried to achieve but in a more structured manner. No, I don't really believe that but there are similarities in approach. FAOL did actually yield some good results and has a strong basic idea. That you can't see it is not a problem, that you have not handled it with respect to editors who put a lot of time into it shows a poor approach. violet/riga [talk] 08:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Jen, I also see it as an "ill-conceived mess".♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Then I will have to consider you rude as well. violet/riga [talk] 08:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Image deletion nominations

Hello Calliopejen1, Given the results of your nomination of File:Chinese_PWs_Battle_of_Kapyong_24_April_1951_(AWM_P04953).jpg in May was a clear cut keep on the grounds that the image is PD ([5]), your renomination of this image for deletion and the nominations of the similar File:NZ_artillery_25_pounder_Korea_1951_(AWM_HOBJ2238).jpg and File:Chinese_PWs_Battle_of_Kapyong_24_April_1951_(AWM_P04953).jpg seem difficult to justify. I'd suggest that you withdraw these nominations and take greater care in the future. Cheers, Nick-D (talk) 08:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

i'll go comment. It seems like people at the last nomination were misinformed. Even if an image is PD in its home country, it is not necessarily PD in the US. Presumably all the archives are commenting on are the copyright status of the image in Australia - not the copyright status of the image in the US. I'll comment again shortly. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Expand language

Hello there. Since you've made a major contribution towards Wikipedia:Translation/Overhaul I'm inviting you to contribute to the current discussion about Template:Expand_language. Thanks for any comments that you may wish to make. Rubywine . talk 15:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm so glad that VioletRiga decided to notify me about this nomination that apparently stemmed from our discussion above.... Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Apologies - I noted it on wp:translate and guessed that you would have it on your watchlist. I then had to disappear for a while and returned to inform the relevant people. Thanks to Rubywine for letting you know. violet/riga [talk] 15:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Photo

Hey Jen :) Do you know how to remove watermarks? [File:Shake it off33.jpg This] photo I uploaded has black logo on the corner, without cropping (or else nevermind) can you remove it? Also, please don't reduce it or crop, I'm going to do that after. A million Thanks :-D--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 17:01, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Oops sorry, missed that among all the drama. It's not really possible to "remove" the watermark easily, because doing so would involve redrawing a portion of Mariah's foot from scratch. I mean, I could do that, but I'm not sure it would be that accurate/encyclopedic. It might be better to cover it with a neutral-colored box. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
No problem Jen! I figured lol. Okay, so how about this. Can you just color that mark with a light gray color matching the shoe? So it isn't as noticeable? I don't mean to ask much, but maybe half the box grey, and half black. The great wiill be by the foot and shoe, and the blakc half of the box by the chairs. Do you think that's okay? Thanks :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

French system for translation requests

Hello Jen. I was only admiring the visual design of the French template - sorry to bring back bad memories! You offered to elaborate on why their system for translation requests is a freaking mess. I'm curious to hear more about this. Rubywine . talk 23:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

here is the disaster those French-style templates spawned. We used to have the French system until I converted all the requests to the new system. Every translation request got its own subpage. Sometimes banners went on the talk pages of articles, but often they didn't, because the process of requesting a translation was really complicated. No new editor could have possibly requested a translation, because the process was this multi-step thing of creating subpages and filling in templates and putting banners on talk pages. The template also has these built-in progress-tracking bars, which were never updated. It also assumes that every article will have a translator and then a copyeditor, which of course never happened. And since most of the translations weren't posted in prominent places (sometimes article talk page, sometimes not even that) they did not get done, and then the English-language articles would surpass the foreign-language articles, but the tags (if they were on talk pages) would never be removed, and the translation request on the dedicated subpage would never be cancelled. So essentially we had all these worthless to-do pages where the articles, a couple years down the line, didn't even need to be translated any more. This is part of the reason I think the templates should go on the article pages at least some of the time - so they get taken off when they're not useful anymore! If they're hidden away, we end up with more useless requests.... Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh lovely. A complex system that added layers of worthless documentation and made all the work pile up and go nowhere. Very well done for getting rid of that! It must have been an enormous job. And yes, I agree that the templates belong on the article pages. It seems pointless (and elitist) to place them where most users won't see them. Rubywine . talk 02:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

thanks for the heads up

regarding File:Franciscan-Hotel.jpg. I tracked it down and left an opinion. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

and thanks, Jen, for your next move too. Putting up a free picture. Carptrash (talk) 16:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
and "yes" please dump the other one. Carptrash (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, the race in on to see who can make a major move at Pueblo Revival Style architecture first. I have about 10,000 fairly random notes on the subject, which perhaps gives me a head start, but they are 7 layers deep in priority as well as in physical reality, which perhaps gives you the advantage. I want to write something about the continued use of the style in New Mexico (where I live) but it definitely would be original research since I have not found much published on that aspect. Using it for McDonalds and strip malls and that sort of thing. Life is supposed to be interesting. Carptrash (talk) 17:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Care to elaborate...

Can you explain why you returned this trolling question to WP:RDH, here: [6]. If you think it is an approrpriate question, can you please explain your choice to return it at WT:RD where I started a thread to discuss the matter? --Jayron32 18:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

oh, I think that was an edit conflict. I didn't know it had been removed, or that I was restoring it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
It's all good, don't sweat it. That kind of thing happens to me all the time. You're cool. Thanks for cleaning up! --Jayron32 18:46, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

Infobox Qconnect operator

I think you wrongly tagged the Template:Infobox Qconnect operator for replacement by a standard template. Template:Infobox bus line, that you suggest, refers to a bus route, while I think that Template:Infobox bus transit would be the correct template to use for a bus company. Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Quirk

[7] Yay! Thanks!

Gods, yeah; let's remember it's supposed to be *enjoyable* - I think mostly that is forgotten!  Chzz  ►  22:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

wow, that was fast!! Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:24, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

TfD:Template:The Marcoses

Please come and have a look at TfD:Template:The Marcoses. I have just discovered something which I find extremely disturbing, and I would really appreciate some independent input. As things currently stand, I am intending to lodge a complaint about the actions of the editor who proposed this template for deletion, and a request that his history of article and template deletion is independently reviewed. Please tell me what you think. Rubywine . talk 20:55, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

19th century US senator cheating on his wife

Even though other users disagreed with you, I would at the very least like to thank you for your answer to my question. Whether or not this was the actual senator Bjørnson was referring to, we might not know, but it is at least a good alternative! :-) 23:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by V85 (talk • contribs)

FAOL anew

Given the previous discussions about WP:FAOL I thought it pertinent to point you in the direction of what I've just been testing. I always maintained that the idea was a good one. I have therefore had a play and come up with a more interesting approach, currently at User:Violetriga/FAOL. violet/riga [talk] 15:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Incomplete FfD

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

Hello, Calliopejen1. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 August 23#File:DSC02188.jpg.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

meta-issues

Howdy!
(Background: You deleted File:Adelaide railway station 1986.jpg - F9: Unambiguous copyright violation)
The problem with admins deleting stuff is that it deletes everything - it means we poor plebian non-admins no longer have access to the history, or to anything else, so we've no idea what went on.
Because I can no longer look, I can no longer be sure, but the caption on one use of the picture said "Adelaide Railway Station platforms 1986, during construction of the Riverside Building and prior to construction of the Adelaide Convention Centre above the platforms", so it would seem that it might have been a good candidate to be "Fair use of a historic event".
I've little doubt (but no ability to check) that the photo may well have been an "F9: Unambiguous copyright violation" with the license that was most probably stated.
But that's not really the point. The point is, if I had been warned before the deletion, I might have been able to address any problems. However, once the file has been deleted, well, I can't do anything useful - I can only complain (and that's not very useful, is it.)

So: What do you think about my above comments? Is there a general solution to the general problems I raise? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:40, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Given a complaint from the copyright holder--see below--(and the non-transformative use of the photo in our article) it is doubtful that this is fair use and/or meets the WP:NFCC. If images are deleted, non-admins can always ask for undeletion, either informally or at a deletion review. Theoretically people nominating photos for deletion are supposed to put a deletion notification in the image's caption, but I'm not sure whether this happened in this case. And as far as F9 speedy-deletions go, those are relatively uncommon and having discussion beforehand would unnecessarily prolong deletion of bad content that exposes Wikipedia to liability. I think in that case it's better to deal with undeletion after-the-fact. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:12, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the comprehensive answers here and below.
(Please note that here, I'm trying to keep away from the distractions of this specific photo, and focus on the meta-issues.)
You say: "Theoretically people nominating photos for deletion are supposed to put a deletion notification in the image's caption". So in that case, (if I'd had the picture on my watchlist), I would have seen something on my watchlist. Well, I don't see how any system could do much better than that. Do you?
(As you say, this picture has not been "a typical case". First, I don't think anything appeared on my watchlist. Second, this particular situation had an air of expediency about it that would not normally be the case. So, I would agree that this picture has not been a fair/"normal" test of the system.)
OK. I'm happy with the meta-issue situation. Thanks for your time and help. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:20, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Adelaide railway station 1986.jpg

Can you reproduce what was "said" on the photo's page about the photo's source and license, etc., so I can consider if it's worth mounting a case for undeleting the file and putting a better license on it? Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:40, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

The only information on the photo's page was a tag saying {{PD-self}}. Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_August_24#File:Adelaide_railway_station_1986.jpg gives the background for why I deleted it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:09, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Please don't mis-understand me - I had little doubt that deletion would have been justified. Now that I've seen the information you've supplied, I have no doubt.
Also to clarify: I have NO doubt that the person who uploaded it cut FAR too many corners!
But the point remains: The caption on one use of the picture said "Adelaide Railway Station platforms 1986, during construction of the Riverside Building and prior to construction of the Adelaide Convention Centre above the platforms", so it would seem that it might have been a good candidate to be "Fair use of a historic event".
You've replied: "Given a complaint from the copyright holder--see below--(and the non-transformative use of the photo in our article) it is doubtful that this is fair use and/or meets the WP:NFCC."
I get the broad thrust, but I don't follow some of the details:
  • "the non-transformative use of the photo in our article" - I'm afraid I don't know what that means.

I've had a bit of help from a colleague. It seems the answer is: the NC in "CC BY-NC-SA" is the show stopper.

What a shame! Oh well. "C'est la vie" I guess. Thanks for your time and help. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:19, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Hello Calliopejen1! I hope you accept this brownie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 06:49, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

File:European cup Final Ticket.jpg listed for deletion

Disagree:

The ticket was issued for a European cup by a completion organization which no longer exists replaced by the champion’s league. This ticket stub, which I bought an used for this match has no copyright attribution on it and so I think there are no copyright issues here. Before you jump to conclusion about deleting this file I suggest that you come up with concrete evidence that the ticket stubb is copyrighted.Stavros1 (talk) 06:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File:File2280.jpg

File:File2280.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Stavros1 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Orphaned, likely copyvio Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:15, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Disagree:

I am getting really fed up with you!. THIS FILE WAS DRAWN BY ME!. I am a CAD draftsman and Beeston Regis priory is located within the parish were I live. I took the time to drawn this accurate plan of the now ruined priory using information from my local library and English heritage. There are no copyright issues as I created this file. Please produce your evidence that this was orphaned. I have the original CAD file on my computer so I think you are making assumption that you will not be able to prove. Stavros1 (talk) 07:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Range_Rover.jpg

What an earth are you on about? this file has nothing to do with me! Please refrain from posting stupid comments about removing files which are nothing to do with me, does make you look rather silly Pandaplodder (talk) 14:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

Block

This blockable?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I suspect he'll be back. If he does it again a permanent block on the ip may be neccesary.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Ancuabe District. Click the external link. There are detailed PDFs on every district of Mozambique in Portuguese. Most are short stubs still... Information about the districts was non existant a few years ago remember? Also Cantons and communes of Gabon, we now have population data!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeha I think so. Masses of information. First of all though the external links the them need to be added. I've done Cabo Delgado.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Request

I request that this edit, made by the anon you have just blocked, be deleted from the article's history. It is disruptive and very insulting. Shahid • Talk2me 21:05, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Done. Seems to satisfy the criteria. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Expand German

Hello Calliopejen, since you've protected Template:Expand German so that it's only editable by administrators, please add the parameter "bio = Biography" to it. I get the impression that "bio = Biography" currently appears only on the French template so if you happen to have the time, I'd suggest it would be a good idea to add it to templates for other languages as well. Thanks. Rubywine . talk 08:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Calliopejen1. You have new messages at Rubywine's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rubywine . talk 18:30, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Image Deletion Status

Hello again! This and this have yet to be resolved after a considerable length of time, and will probably not go away on their own. What is your current position on these nominations for deletion that you proposed? Inquiring minds want to know, and we want to put this issue to rest. Please respond at your earliest convenience. Cheers :> Doc talk 06:35, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

My current position is that they should be deleted - I'm not going to withdraw, if that's what you're looking for... Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:56, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
(Sigh) Of course that is what I was looking for. So be it - but I should tell you this appears to be a losing battle. 100% free PD images determined to be taken by state/federeal employees should not be confused with CC-by-SA licenses that are 100% legitimately issued by the FBI and the State of Florida. If the FBI pic needs a license change from PD to CC-by-SA, I could understand. But to second-guess these significant entities when all evidence points to their legitimacy in issuing CC-by-SA licenses not only to us but to anyone seems a futile effort. Good luck, see you on the Commons (I hope) and Cheers :> Doc talk 09:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Huh? First of all, CC-BY-SA is a specific legal document and has nothing with either of these photos. Neither government agency has purported to issue these under CC-BY-SA. And that license can only be granted by the copyright holder. You have to be the copyright holder before you can grant a creative commons license. Find an explicit statement from an appropriate authority that the Florida government owns the copyrights to the images in its archives--and forward it to OTRS--and I will shut up. Or find evidence that the FBI took the photo of Bundy (and therefore it is PD as a work of the federal government). That's really pretty minimal. There is no sign that the defenders of the images have gone to any effort to verify their copyright status. And the burden is on the person trying to show that an image is free. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:17, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
No one has ever said the Florida images were free/PD. Just that Florida's claim to license them to anyone supercedes our interpretation. As I pointed out, author Kevin M. Sullivan actually used one of the images for his book The Bundy Murders (which is sold for profit), and all he had to do was credit the Florida archives. Nothing else. For other images not in the archives he had to pay AP and other agencies for their use. Why would the "true" copyright holder allow Florida to do this? It makes no sense that they would unless it was legitimate. Same for the FBI. Doc talk 23:03, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

DB report

Hi Calliopejen1. Hope you're well. As a regular contributor to WP:FFD, you may be interested in this bot generated report; it could use a few more eyes. Best, FASTILY (TALK) 01:08, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

Nice job!

Internet-related article improvement award
Nice job with your huge expansion of Internet in Bahrain, an article I created ages ago. It looks really good now! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 01:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

United States v. Wong Kim Ark

Hi. Thanks for your earlier feedback on the Wong Kim Ark article. I've done a lot of work on the article in the past few days, and I would be grateful if you could take another look at it now and let people know whether your objections to its becoming a Featured Article have (or have not) been satisfactorily addressed. Thanks. Richwales (talk · contribs) 04:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:L'Officiel.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:L'Officiel.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{non-free fair use in|article name that the file is used in}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 11:24, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Burmese lists

Hi. i was wondering if you could use the excel sheet by province of http://themimu.info/Pcodes/index.php to create a full list of settlements in Burma. It has all of the sub district info and about 50,000 out of 68,000 have coordinates which could go in a table? Can you do this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:12, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Like this I guess. Of course though at it would be likely you'd create pages by district, the state and district columns might be removed..

Location Village Tract Sub-Township Township District Region/State Coordinates
(links to map & photo sources) 		Notes
Foo Hi Thaik Thaik Pego Hpathiwe Shan 13°38′02″S 72°52′53″W / 13.63389°S 72.88139°W / -13.63389; -72.88139 (Abancay)
Foo Pu Thaik Thaik Pego Hpathiwe Shan 13°38′02″S 72°52′53″W / 13.63389°S 72.88139°W / -13.63389; -72.88139 (Abancay)

Ignore the Burmese.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:01, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Jen. :) Not sure if you noticed, but MER-C discovered that User:S710 continued on Wikipedia as User:S711, which complicates that particular CCI. I'm not sure if his persisted in copyright problems after he took up his new account, although certainly it's worth looking into. He does acknowledge that he was careless in his early days but has been a dedicated contributor up to the present time and believes that he has been more careful recently. He's hoping that we will continue to evaluate case by case, under the circumstances. You can see his note to me here. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:12, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

clean up

Hi, Calliopejen1. I will most certainly make an effort at cleaning up all copy right violations I made (some years ago) as S710. I will follow the article list of the CCI board. Can you please tell me what the meaning is of the numbers (indicated after the article's title), or are they just arbitrary?S711 (talk) 18:24, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Paulus.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Paulus.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 21:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Far, far too big

I suggest that list of villages in Hinthada District needs to be split into about six separate pages. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:16, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. (I had actually already created List of villages in Hinthada Township as a split from that page - just need to do the other townships now. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:38, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


190.161.134.66

Would you perhaps take a moment and remind this user not to make comments about other contributors? He is obviously not listening to me, nor is he heeding the advice he was given by another admin. Another reminder might be necessary. Thanks! ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 20:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I just went ahead and blocked him for a bit. Wikipedia does not need to waste time dealing with editors who can't act like grown-ups. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Just as well, as this edit summary indicates he is not taking a hint. Thanks! ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 20:58, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

File:John8707.jpg

Hi. I see you placed a tag on this file, File:John8707.jpg, saying that a source is needed. It is a picture of the person who uploaded it, who has released it into the public domain. Is it your concern that he is not the actual copyright holder? From an abstract point of view, I can see the issue - unless he made a self-portrait or paid someone to take the picture then the copyright would be held by the photographer, not the subject. But the common practice on Wikipedia seems to be to assume that people hold the copyright to snapshots taken of themselves and in their possession, regardless of who took the picture. Are you opposed to that routine accomodation?   Will Beback  talk  23:07, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I didn't see that it was supposedly a self-portrait. My only concern now would be getting OTRS verification that he's who he says he is, since it looks like a publicity photo. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
We (and by 'we' I mean several editors including Jimmy Wales and myself) have had extensive communications with the editor, on and off-wiki. I can vouch for his identity. Thanks for addressing my concern promptly, and thanks for working to improve the project.   Will Beback  talk  23:57, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
In recognition of your careful and diligent work on behalf of the project for more than four years, it's my honor to award you this Barnstar of Diligence.   Will Beback  talk  10:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Wong Kim Ark possible future FAC

Hi. Last month, you offered some input on the Featured Article candidacy of United States v. Wong Kim Ark. The article was not promoted at that time, but I'm continuing to work on it and am hoping to renominate it sometime in the near future.

You were concerned at the time that the material in the article discussing the impact of the case was woefully lacking in a foundation built on secondary sources (especially on early sources dealing with contemporary reactions to the decision). I accepted this criticism and put a lot of work into finding more sources — including sources from around the time of the case — and I believe the current text is significantly better than it was — but in the absence of any followup comments from you, I can't be sure if I really addressed your concerns.

I would be extremely grateful if you would be willing to take another look at the "Subsequent developments" section of the article and let me know what you think of it now. I know I asked for your feedback a few weeks ago (while the FAC was still in play), but for whatever reason you never responded. I hope you'll say something now — so that I can know whether I handled the issues, still have a way to go, or simply didn't get the point — but if it turns out that you are simply not willing to spend any more time on this article (either now or at a possible future FAC), let me know and I won't pester you further. Richwales (talk) 02:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier. I didn't have time to give it much more serious thought - though I didn't think it would have been possible to do all the necessary research from scratch during the FAC. I can give it a look-over, but I can't really give much more advice because now that I am working and not in law school, I only have very expensive Westlaw/Lexis access, and I can't really say if it's a comprehensive treatment of the available sources without doing searches in those databases... Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I have LEXIS/NEXIS access, but when I attempted to search for older Wong Kim Ark material during the FAC, I was unable to get LEXIS/NEXIS to give me anything older than 1973 (even when I specified "all available dates" in the search). I also have ProQuest access, and I had better luck there — several law review articles and newspaper editorials from around the time of the decision, as well as information about a 1942 case involving Japanese-Americans in which one of the lawyers argued (unsuccessfully) that Wong Kim Ark was bad law and that the Supreme Court should be given an opportunity to overrule it. As for one other question you had raised — why Wong Kim Ark's case jumped from district court directly to the Supreme Court, and via appeal rather than certiorari — someone else found that the law in force at the time (the Judiciary Act of 1891, a.k.a. the Evarts Act) allowed direct SCOTUS appeal in cases involving the construction or application of the Constitution, or the constitutionality of an act of Congress. If you can offer me any more feedback, I'd greatly appreciate it. I do plan to nominate this article again (after a content dispute I'm having with another editor has been settled), and if you see any problems, I'd prefer if possible to take care of them now rather than during a second FAC. Thanks again. Richwales (talk) 16:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Fashion

I started Silvia Tcherassi. Do you think Tuti Barrera meets notability requirements? There are sources like this and a few hits in google books but I couldn't find an entry in the fahsion model directory. Any thoughts?♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Image source thingy

You listed an image MediaWiki says I uploaded File:Pagosa Springs Panoramic.gif - just to let you know, in case you come across the same issue again (you probably will) - the original image uploaded was corrupted with a small number of others when something went a little awry with the WMF servers. This resulted in a few administrators trying to recover images from the WP dumps, from mirrors, caches etc, and if I remember correctly, from the upload.wikimedia.org server with help from Brion, Tim et al. There's a dozen or so similar images in my Uploads section (should be on the first page), and what we uploaded are the original images, as uploaded, but they may appear at different resolutions owing to the way they were recovered and re-uploaded. I hope that's clear, if not, get back to me. Nick (talk) 10:50, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

CCI update

CCI complete Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Ose\fio is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

Fabulous feeling to close another. :) Your work there is always appreciated.--Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of villages in Hinthada District for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of villages in Hinthada District is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of villages in Hinthada District until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --Rossheth | Talk to me 17:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, can you place your lists in Category:Lists of villages by township of the Ayeyarwady Region? Cheers. Some things, can you greatly reduce the size of the notes section, and widen the coordinate and other columns? Just unlikely they will be filled in the near future. Also I think it might be better if you wikilink the villages to start off with and put them in alpha order by default if this is possible? This way they can be dabbed in the future.. By the end of this I would also like a List of village tracts of Burma..♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:59, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Purrfect, if you could also format the ones you started in the same way this would be great. Yeah Template:Hsi Hseng Township is at TFD too. Not complaining as its ignited my interest in Burma again and doesn't stand a chance of being deleted..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:50, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

If you could list all your lists under List of populated places in Burma this would be great.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Only thing is that a lot of the transliterationns differ from those on google and geonames. Like Da Yei Pauk =Dayebauk. The positive thing though is that the settlement do all exist of course! But it will require quite a lot of concentration to match em up. View Dayebauk here on google earth. Looks great.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:12, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Grrr wikipedia is full of irritating people today. Can you AFD List of cities, towns and villages in Burma: A, List of cities, towns and villages in Burma: B and List of cities, towns and villages in Burma: Y and Template:Lists of Burma locations. These lists are now alienated anyway as List of cities, towns and villages has been redirected to list of populated places and your lists. But my db-author tags were removed senselessly.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Have you given up on the lists?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I think I'm yet to see you ever complete a task Jen! You gave up on the Chile dictionary too!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:50, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

CCI update

CCI complete Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/FlyingToaster is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

Thank you very much. :D--Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
I'm quite impressed with your diligent work identifying images, preventing unnecessary deletions. Thank you so much! You have earned this barn star. – Quadell (talk) 11:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Kind request of improuvement and translation for Ludmilla Radchenko Thanks in advance from the heart

Good morning to you,


I write you first to greet you and to wish you a good day, it thrives, generous and full of successes. In addition to this, you point out this article about a Russian model living in Italy, but which is also active in the United States and Anglophone countries. It's called Ludmilla Radchenko, and I got to know during his fashion show in my native land. Is a very sweet girl, sweet and friendly, typical of Russian. I'm asking you because I saw that you are a member of the fashion project, and who better than you can bring back on track, I trust you fully. cure them in detail. said thank you in advance that my whole heart, and if you need it for the Italian or the Sicilian, I am at your disposal. Thanks for everything, and good start to the day. cordially. Luigi--Lodewijk Vadacchino (talk) 06:03, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Kootical pic

Hi - I have no objection to Kootical.jpg being deleted. It is a poor graphic and I have no recollection of uploading it. I must have been less than attentive - thanks for bringing it to my attention. MarkDask 23:16, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Expand other language

Template:Expand other language has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bulwersator (talk) 06:45, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Fastily/FfD

Hi Calliopejen1. As you probably know, when nominating files for deletion at WP:FFD using twinkle, it occasionally fails to list the file. Because of this bug, I have set up a program to generate a list of files nominated for deletion without an associated nomination. A few of the files you nominated for deletion came up in the report, so I thought you might be interested in this list. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 21:33, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

File:MBD mordechai ben david mbd (47).JPG

Hi there. You tagged File:MBD mordechai ben david mbd (47).JPG for deletion at PUF, but it seems you forgot to actually list the file. Just thought I'd point this out to you. Regards. — ξxplicit 22:07, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Careful there

Almost everything you've listed in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 October 24 was already listed on the 20th. Mangoe (talk) 02:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

The listings seemed to have gotten deleted in a mistaken edit, but I didn't want to restore them in case some had been renominated elsewhere. So I was just renominating them individually. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:22, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Calliopejen1/Archive 9! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 12:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC).


Images "X ... parenthesis... .svg"

Hi - I have no objection to either of these images being deleted. I had trouble making changes and so I uploaded what I needed under other names. Congratulations for your services to Wikipedia. RMPK (talk) 04:38, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

File:Yagura castle.png deletion

Thanks for notifying me about this file. I updated its 'talk' page, but yes please go ahead and rmove the file. It is redundant. --Ph0kin (talk) 03:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

That was a very good addition you made to the essay about image arguments to avoid. Thanks! By the way, I think you do excellent work in that area. --Tryptofish (talk) 13:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Hmm....

In this edit you introduced a ton of material that appears to be directly copied from this book. As you say you are a Harvard law graduate and the editors of the book are associated with Harvard Law, I am thinking that perhaps this is not a straightforward case of plagiarism / copyright violation, but that perhaps you have permission? (I know John Palfrey, and of coursee he's a friend of Wikipedia, so that wouldn't shock me.) If not, I'm afraid we need to delete this.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 15:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

That content is Creative Commons-licensed, as you can see in the note giving credit at the bottom of the article and at the source link (see footer). It looks like they must have republished the content in a book, but that doesn't change the fact that they granted a Creative Commons license... I'm not really sure why they didn't CC license the book also, considering that the content (or some version of some part of it) is already free, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to make money off of your content in one venue, even if you've released it freely in another. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:56, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Great, super. Sorry to have bothered you. Thanks!--Jimbo Wales (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

File:P7060098.JPG listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect File:P7060098.JPG. Since you had some involvement with the File:P7060098.JPG redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:P1040167.JPG listed for deletion

It can be deleted. It is no longer used on the Route 32 page anyways. Thank you. Mlaurenti (talk) 19:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:W4sdatabase-example.jpg

As far as I can see the file where is was uploaded is the only place where it's origin is recorded. As it is the source for File:W4sdatabase-example.png (with which is was replaced on WP) I wonder if the licence requirement for the use of the derivative means the image itself has to be kept? Otherwise the risk is that someone else will tidy up the derivative at some point, find a part of the copyright history is missing and delete it? I am, incidentally, not remotely fussed about deleting the image aside this point. --BozMo talk 06:46, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

File:James Hendin.jpg listed for deletion

Regarding the picture of me that was loaded onto Wikipedia ... I never loaded that file myself. Someone who knew my password loaded it. It was done without my authorization. They took it from my Facebook page. Jhendin (talk) 17:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

Request for help in adding template to IEP user pages

Hi Jen, I saw that you added the {{Template:User WikiProject India Education Program}} template to the user pages of many IEP students. We finally have a more complete list of all (well, most of ;-) the participants in the program. Since you seem to have prepared a script to add the template to the user pages, perhaps you'd like to look into this list as well, if you find the time? Please have a look here: Wikipedia talk:India Education Program#Students and articles. I think, having these students grouped in a category would be of quite some help in the ongoing process to spot and clean up all those copyvios, etc. Thanks and greetings, Matthias. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Hahaha... no, no script. I just did a search for ".mech" in usernames and was adding them manually. (There are a couple more common suffixes that might be worth looking into, in case the list is incomplete.) If I have more time, I may add more of them, but if others want to pitch in it could get done faster. Adding tags to that list could also be done using AWB if someone makes a page with just a linked list of users, and then loads the links from that page into AWB. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

PNG rivers

Hey. I was wondering if you could use your skills to extract a List of rivers of Papua New Guinea for me from geonames. Just I created Warangoi River and looking at the satellite there's tons of rivers in New Britain alone.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:02, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Not the data I'm after, its the names of the rivers, which yes I think would be legit.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Email contact

Hello, Voceditenore, I am an editor of the Wikipedia Signpost writing a story on the India Education Program, and was advised that you might have some insight to share on the situation. I've already interviewed the consultant for the program, and was going to email you for a response, but you email is disabled. Please get in touch if you are interested in participating. The story needs to be finished by 21:00 UTC today. Thanks, Skomorokh 13:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 November2011

Iranian images

Hi, Can you bot upload User:Carlossuarez46/photos from Persian wiki? Loads of free valuable images of smaller towns.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:30, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, plus it would be a lot of working uploading them all!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:48, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, if you use google chrome and have the pages translated you'll get the gist of the Farsi, also the GNU and Copyright with a slash through it logos are readable without translation. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, i know, but sometimes people put things like "my friend took it" or other vague comments indicating that there is a problematic licensing situation. Normally I'll even click through a user's other photo uploads before transferring an image to the commons, to check for copyright red flags. All this requires better than Google translate IMO, which generally mangles translations from Farsi. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:12, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

File namespace noticeboard idea

Hi there. As a file worker, I'd like your input on the idea of a noticeboard for file workers. The prototype is at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#File Namespace Noticeboard.

Please comment at the VPIL thread, or edit the page linked to there directly, as I can't keep track of this conversation if everyone I invite to comment on the matter responds on their own talk pages. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Hilya

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

Argentine films

Hi. User:George Ho is tagging tons of Argentina cinema images for deletion even though many are photographs taken of the directors and actors in like 1940s/1950s and are 40 years into the public domain. Many images can also be found on the acceder buenos aires site which I believe lists many images with the authors on it. The authors are likely to be the film companies they work for.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Dunno, the ones I originally got from cinenacional are no longer there, There is an image of Enrique Carreras here from 1962. Can that be uploaded?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. But there are still loads of Argentine cinema images like File:ArturoS.Mom.jpg with fair use rationales when they are public domain but need to be chased up with the url links etc. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:45, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Will replace with this♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:52, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Joan Mondale Photo

I noticed that you recently edited the photo currently being used in the Joan Mondale article, and I wanted to let you know about a question raised regarding that photo on the article's Talk page. Please see Talk:Joan Mondale for further details. --TommyBoy (talk) 23:17, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for responding to my inquiry and removing the inaccurate photo from the article. --TommyBoy (talk) 13:21, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Harry's pool.jpg listed for deletion

By all means proceed with deletion. Alas, an experiment long since on saving photos; should have deleted myself but alas didn't know how! Plenty of photos of mine brought in for vastly more justifiable causes. Apology of course for causing so trivial a task. Masalai (talk) 04:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

Request for Time: India Education Program Learnings

Hi. I'm writing to request a favor. The India Education Program pilot is concluding in Pune, India. It has been extraordinarily challenging and a series of learnings have emerged from the pilot that we intend to take on board to inform the way forward. I had promised an honest, open and comprehensive review. There are multiple ways that we are trying to collate and distill these learnings. One of these is that the Foundation has commissioned a study to do in depth interviews with a wide variety of folks who were directly or indirectly involved in the pilot. The include discussions with students, Ambassadors, faculty as well as members of the global community such as yourself. I thought it would be really particularly useful if we could get your views. You have been involved in the project (albeit not as part of the formal project structure.) I thank you for your involvement. You have made some interesting and insightful comments in the discussions you have participated in. Would you be willing and available for the person working on this study so that she can get your feedback and suggestions and comments? If so, would you let me know on my talk page? Do also let me know how I can have her reach out to you. Many thanks in advance. Hisham (talk) 10:00, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Broken FfDs

Hello there. I noticed several files you placed up at FfD did not properly transclude to the FfD page, including File:UAC warehouse2-floor layout.jpg and File:K-bots UK logo.jpg. Since I don't know your deletion rationales, please go to User:Fastily/FfD, check to see which ones on the list are yours, and resubmit them. Thanks! Sven Manguard Wha? 03:54, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Is there a problem?

I'm not sure from your comments at WT:NOT whether you think there is one, but if you think there's a problem with the way Wikipedia handles controversial images, would you like to tell me what it is here? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 11:05, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

Pune pilot analysis plan

Hi! As you were very active in discussions about the India Education Program's Pune pilot, I wanted to draw your attention to Wikipedia:India_Education_Program/Analysis, a page that documents our analysis plan for the next few months. I encourage you to join the discussion if you have any thoughts. -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk) 23:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Image

Hi I think File:Platinum-magna.jpg is an obivous copyvio. The same user may have uploaded other vios claiming to own them.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:20, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, all copyright violations--tagged on commons. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Seagal_111130234745.png‎ and File:Steven Seagal 2011.jpg, more vios. The user on the second one claims to have taken the image today on December 2 in concert and its only 16:40 on the east coast!! If he does actually have permission he needs to prove it. Can you sort out the second one in the commons?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:57, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Both tagged. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

He reverted you. You'll have to keep an eye on it as he'll keep reverting the tagging. He is now claiming it to have been taken in October when he put down July. He has got the date wrong again, the same image was taken on the 13 October! To me it looks as if he simply googled for a date when Seagal played a gig. Its not a nice image anyway, the others are better..♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:58, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Hatice Guleryuz Profile.jpg

Please do not delete this file; I made the photo myself of Hatice Guleryuz and it can be transfered to Wikimedia Commons. Shousokutsuu (talk) 03:14, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I will withdraw the deletion request. I was careless and assumed this was just a photo of a Wikipedian. Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:18, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Incomplete FfD's

This FfD's has no discussion. I have removed the tag.


— Train2104 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Pretty much all of the ones at User:Fastily/FfD are from this user and were tagged on the same date. Not sure what to do, as he hasn't responded to my above message, and I don't know the deletion rationales for some of them. Sven Manguard Wha? 12:44, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
I've now gone through that list and renominated the ones that I was originally responsible for, plus perhaps a few more. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:04, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

Wong Kim Ark hopeful second FAC

Hi. I wanted to ask you once more if you have any more feedback to offer regarding United States v. Wong Kim Ark. See here for the last exchange on this subject which we had in October. I'm hoping to try again in the near future to get this article to FA, but I want to fix as many problems as I can first. You were the only person with unresolved concerns from the last FAC, and although I believe I took care of these issues, I'm hesitant to nominate the article again without seeing if you agree. Thanks. — Richwales (talk) 04:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

Deleting pngs replaced by svgs

Yes, deletions are fine by me.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 17:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Richard Arthur Norton: Revisiting topic ban; Should it be removed or made indefinite?

Hi Calliopejen1. You participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive228#Richard Arthur Norton copyright violations, in which a one-month topic ban on creating new articles and making page moves was imposed on Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk · contribs). The closing admin has asked for community input about whether to remove the topic ban or make it indefinite at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Richard Arthur Norton: Revisiting topic ban; Should it be removed or made indefinite?. Cunard (talk) 08:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:B Puzzle colours.png

Hey, thanks for notifying me on the image. I commented at its entry for deletion - I'm okay with it if it goes. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 18:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Feedback Dashboard


 The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for your excellent comments to new editors at the Feedback Dashboard! It hasn't gone unnoticed :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
thanks for helping me. And hope for your help in the future.

Mazar Big101big (talk) 21:25, 18 December 2011 (UTC)


re: Your Message

Hi Calliopejen1, I've left a response to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 talk 02:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. In Kristian Kristiansen (explorer), you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Norwegian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

Thank you for your advice. I am always careful in deleting articles. Whether a forthcoming film stars notable actors and/or directors or not, that does not impart notability to the film itself, especially when it has not yet been released. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

As you wish. You are free to take your point to deletion review if you choose. But my opinion remains as it was. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 23:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Additional point; as the two actors mentioned, and the director, are not linked to anything, how could one tell that they are themselves notable? I have heard of Imran Khan, if this the the same person as the former international cricketer. The others, no. I think that this concudes my involvement here. Please either go to WP:DRV or drop it. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 23:06, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
OK; on consideration you may well have a point, although there is in the guidelines some latitude for intrepretation. I have tried to make it a rule never to argue with any graduate of Harvard Law School, on the assumption that the training there guarantees that I will lose any argument that I get involved in! Given that the article clearly merits deletion , which category would you rather it had been deleted under? And does it really matter? --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 17:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
Thanks for moving my question on the Harvard Jared Sparks Library collection (containing Henry Vane's writings). 
Robert D. Miles 02:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

Nomination for deletion of Template:PD-VietnamGov

Template:PD-VietnamGov has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:09, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Your message on my talk page

As you will see by the error details below, the script I refer to is neither a virus nor one installed by another site.

Warning: Unresponsive script

A script on this page may be busy, or it may have stopped responding. You can stop the script now, or you can continue to see if the script will complete.

http://bits.wikimedia.org/en.wikipedia.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki&only=scripts&skin=vector&version=20111213T185322Z:8

Teeth in acid (talk) 11:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:PD-US-patent-no-notice listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:PD-US-patent-no-notice. Since you had some involvement with the Template:PD-US-patent-no-notice redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Joyeux Nöel!

You deserve a cookie because you're not mean! Galadrist (talk) 21:36, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Wally Lamb, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages New London and Maximum-security prison (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

Thank you [I am confused]

Hello Calliopejen1!

Thank you for your warm words in my talk page. I am so sorry that I gave you unwanted situation. [Sorry, my English is not very good.]

Today, I read your message. And, I am surprised too [I'm really surprised. I thought nobody reads me]. And, I believe, I wrote those lines some where... but, I can not remember where did I wrote that. And, yes... BOT correction were there. I believe in local language, example: ne.wikipedia.org I am not sure, but I think I wrote that sentence, as a protest for bad BOT, which corrected but made grammatical mistakes.

I think, manual editing is effective because BOT made few mistakes.

I am so sorry. I do not want to disturb you.

I wish you all the best. Happy new year.

ps. I will inform those BOT, to be gentle while correcting few things in a very near future.

Bye. (Smile)

ठिस बुढा (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC).

Nomination for deletion of Template:LOC-image-ammem

Template:LOC-image-ammem has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Kumioko (talk) 14:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

Wong Kim Ark 2nd FAC

Hi. The second FAC for United States v. Wong Kim Ark is still going on. I think I mentioned this to you earlier, and I apologize for bothering you if you're simply too busy or no longer care about what happens to this article, but I feel an obligation to let you know that one of the reviewers this time around appears to be insisting that the article must include large amounts of material that is very similar to things you insisted should not be in the article during its first FAC last September. For example, I've been told I need to shepardize Wong Kim Ark and mention (at least in footnotes) all 30-some-odd Supreme Court cases which cite WKA. Also, that I need to hunt down and mention every court case prior to Wong Kim Ark which says anything about the Citizenship Clause. I've tried to lean as heavily as possible on two law review articles from an 1890's writer which discuss the case in depth, and to force myself to stick mostly to what these articles talk about, but to no avail. I'm asking you to consider participating in this second FAC because I'm concerned that if there are two apparently diametrically opposing opinions out there (i.e., yours and his), the two views are inevitably going to clash at some point, and we're probably all better off if we can get everyone to hash it out now and get it over with. I really have no idea what the end result will be — whether you'll prevail, or the other person will, or if everyone can reach a consensus, or if the article is just going to get caught in an irreconcilable crossfire between two opposing camps — but I believe we might as well figure it out if at all possible. Thanks. — Richwales 09:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Responded there. In short: I don't think you should be hunting down the cases yourself because of OR issues, but I'm not sure why there aren't secondary sources cited in the article have done this analysis already. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks very much for your comments on the FAC page. If you could go check Savidan's reply to what you wrote, and perhaps respond again, that might be helpful. I'm assuming at this point that this FAC round is going to end up closing (archived), because it seems clear that I've got a bunch more work to do on this article — but I think it would be helpful to have as much information and commentary in the FAC as possible before it gets closed up. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts. — Richwales 01:40, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Grandidier's baobab, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Endemic and Scrub (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

v/r...

...means "Very Respectfully"....my name is TP  ;) --v/r - TP 04:39, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I just received a message

from you regarding

File:WaddellDance01.jpg

, which is one of a series of my shots by the artist. The photo at the John Henry Waddell article of the artist is by me, taken the day he said, "Go ahead and use pictures of my art on wikipedia". Since then I have been in contact with , I believe, his daughter, about using them and have not received a reply to my "Please fill out this release form" email. I am not inclined to bug her, nor am I inclined to argue law with a Harvard Law grad about this sort of thing. If you feel the best thing to do is remove the lot, them please do that. I hate to think of you staying up nights worrying about it. Tomorrow I will send off one more message to the daughter, till then, do what you need to do and it will be okay with me. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 06:45, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Buddhist philosophy is clear that "impermanence surrounds us," never more so than with orphans. I re-scanned the images to send them to Waddell's daughter, if I get the thumbs-up on them I will put them back, Thanks for your patience and understanding. Carptrash (talk) 00:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:AC-image

Template:AC-image has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:05, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Wong Kim Ark 2nd FAC (restarted)

FYI, SandyGeorgia has "restarted" the FAC discussion "for a fresh look" on where everyone stands on this article. — Richwales 02:54, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Community input required: lowering delist bar at FPC

You are receiving this because of your current or past association with the Featured Pictures project. Following on from several cases where closers did not observe the prescribed minimum votes required for a delisting, there is now a motion to entirely dismiss the requirement for a minimum. Please participate in the discussion as wide-ranging changes may arise.

Link: Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates#Delist procedure changes Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (talk) 14:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

Thanks and Review Changes?

Hello Calliopejen1,

First, I want to thank you for your help and advice on the Wally Lamb article. This was my first stab at editing on Wikipedia, and (needless to say) I have a lot to learn. I've tried to follow your advice and have added inline citations. Would you please review the article? I'm also not sure how to remove the warnings, and would appreciate your help with that, if you are willing.

Cheers, Amanda Amandatindersmith (talk) 23:32, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

Have responded to the raising of a subject-to-deletion flag on an uploaded file

Thank you for the alert to my talk page. I may need more help here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_February_7#File:G_semantics1946model.png

Regards,

Canhelp (talk) 17:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your fast help. I have made an interim update to the Files_for_deletion page, and I will stay on top of this, hoping the copyright holder will reply to me soon. Canhelp (talk) 02:53, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

MSU Interview

Dear Calliopejen1,


My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 21:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Shonisaurus images

Yes, the first image is inaccurate due to the presence of a dorsal fin--it's also a bit too close to the old "fat" style of reconstruction. I removed the second older image for the same reason, but it seems that the more slender reconstruction applies only to S. sikanniensis'. While S. popularis is not as fat as usually depicted (or as fat as the dorsal fin image), the old Nobu Tamura image seems to be reasonable and can probably be used. MMartyniuk (talk) 16:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

lists of images

Symbiosis award! Thanks for checking lists!

Bulwersator (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Bullfrog, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:29, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of the picture File:Myphoto213.jpg

hey, its been a while since I logged on to Wikipedia. So pardon the lack of formatting, and I have forgotten the password too.

Please go ahead and delete the image. I have been trying to delete it for so long, it comes up in all the google image searches. Also, can you delete my userpage? I don't want to type it, else it will come up in google search.

Not sure if you know the Indian English term- Kindly do the needful. lol, thanks a lot.

--76.111.95.130 (talk) 14:51, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Done! Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:23, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Bivalves

Wikiproject Bivalves
 Hello Calliopejen1! I've noticed your edits on pages relating to Bivalves; perhaps you'd be interested in joining WikiProject Bivalves.
If you would like more information please visit the project page. I too am an attorney in what we often call "real life", and a malacologist / Wiki-editor in my spare time. I noticed your edits and uploaded images on some of our bivalve pages. We could use another interested editor with an eye for articles that need help, and images. Please visit the project and talk page. Shellnut (talk) 23:40, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Re:User:Bulwersator/Echo/Images/Animals

Re:User:Bulwersator/Echo/Images/Animals

It may be a good idea to nominate pictures like this for deletion (done with this image) Bulwersator (talk) 06:38, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

For that one, all of the uploader's images were suspect so I left a message on the administrator's noticeboard hoping that someone would go through a batch deletion for all of them. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2012


Your input request at RfC

As a previous contributor to the discussion, I wanted to let you know that a motion has been made to close the recent RfC and implement some of the ideas with regards to labeling and usage. Your inputs would be greatly appreciated at Wikipedia_talk:Copyrights#Wrapping_this_up. Buffs (talk) 01:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Convert to Infobox Settlement

Template:Convert to Infobox Settlement has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Sister links. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Sister links redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). MGA73 (talk) 15:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

Smart blacklist

Yes, I noticed problem and smart blacklist is planned - but for now it is waiting for more time. Bulwersator (talk) 22:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Re:File:Luis and Bobbi1.jpg

Re:File:Luis and Bobbi1.jpg

I replied on your ffd Bulwersator (talk) 09:35, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of MU panoramic


Muhammad Calligraphy

You recently removed the infobox image from the article Muhammad, as copyvio. This has been called into question, here. [8] If you could followup that would be appreciated. Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:07, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
You've done a good job when writing about "Religious Freedom in Syria". I dared formalize your article and add information. Your original "critical" stance toward the situation there is untouched. I merely put it at the end of the article (as it does not really reflect de iure situation. It perfectly describes the de facto situation). I hope that suits you :-) cheers, from Switzerland Babybaby78 (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar! Wikipedia aims for a neutral point of view, however. To the extent that the original article (which I didn't write, I pasted from a public domain U.S. government report) was non-neutral, it should be revised to make it more neutral. Thanks for your additions to the article, too! Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:56, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Re:User:Bulwersator/Echo/Images/Animals

Re:User:Bulwersator/Echo/Images/Animals

I added option for smarter blacklist, in result File:American Bullfrog Rana catesbeiana Side 1800px.jpg is ignored for article en:Lithobates. To request addition of more files to blacklist - add message on User_talk:Bulwersator or pl:User_talk:Bulwersator Bulwersator (talk) 09:46, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Muhammad images

I think the Rfc is nearly finalized, but only a few editors have commented recently, not including you. Could you take a look & let us know what you think at Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/11_February_2012/Muhammad-images#Finalizing_Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment.2FMuhammad_images. Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 14:51, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Las Meninas

Just to let you know, an image nominated by you at FPC has been nominated to be replaced. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

Image of pilgrim reception centre

I am sorry for bothering you with this. An image was deleted in December that had been active for so many years. I just can't understand why arbitrary rules are being used to constantly delete images. Despite what you might believe, many of these things seem to be done at whim and without even due process. Personally, I am not happy that hard work gets over written by people who don't know any better. You wrote this: "A file that you uploaded or altered, File:HaifaPilgrimCenter.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:40, 4 December 2011 (UTC)" Upon further research the condition for deletion is listed here: "no indication of free licensing on source page (now dead - see archive version) Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:40, 4 December 2011 (UTC)"

And I would like to know where you got that idea? I also would like to know if you took the time to find a suitable replacement and re-embed it in the original page where it was intended?

If you have found a suitable replacement, then I have no problem with your action. If you have not found a suitable replacement then I take issue with your action and seek you to reverse it. I know that the author personally intended the image to be available for free use. I am aware of this through means outside of the webpage that is referenced as the source. I am aware of this through direct channels. I am also aware of the intentions intended by the author for the sharing of the images. This was so long ago that it cannot be verified any more. But nevertheless, there must be a Grandfathering-in or a suitable replacement. nmentha (talk) 1:26, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Arthropleura

Fixed (image was on the blacklist), change will be visible during next update. BTW, this Tarsius tarsier is more and more irritating :) Bulwersator (talk) 07:20, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Madeleine Chéruit

Hi. I noticed you created the page on Madeleine Chéruit years ago. I ran across a nice drawing of her by Paul Helleu, an article that I just rewrote, then added the Helleu image and some others to expand Chéruit article. By your work on L'Officiel, you seem to be a fashion maven. If you run across some 20s fashions by her, I think they would make a nice addition to her page. This is just an FYI. (Sorry about my bad English, but writing this stuff is how I improve.) Tchao, Charvex (talk) 12:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Translate templates

Please can you add "without attribution" on the end of the template messages as by telling readers they can't translate it completely defeats the object of having them in the first place. As long as you attribute it the text can be translated.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:08, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

How about, unless you able to proof read it and attribute it? on the end♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:32, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
For making some excellent changes and problem solving with the Expand language templates. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

De nada. Dunno, the current version I'd say is the most ideal its ever been. And it also alerts the reader more that the empty sub stubs have some sort of purpose and even if they don't translate can access to information. The German translation is still pretty lame though never translated a page without major errors. What I'd like to see of course is a bot drawing up a full list of missing articles by wikipedia and then blue linking them, but doubt it'll ever happen!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:35, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Finally getting somewhere..♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

this edit [9] appeared to be a case of vandalism, hence it was reverted, the inverted exclamation marks etc. sorry for the trouble. by the way i saw the article got proposed by another editor for deletion -- ÐℬigXЯaɣ 12:15, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

How times have changed

I remember even just 2 or 3 years back complaining that we couldn't find info on towns in Africa in countries like Gabon. Lebamba and Donguila would have been the typical one line sub stubs! Not any more! Obviously its still sketchy and most African villages are still not covered but its a major improvement. BTW would you be interested in a challenge to get 100,000 articles on Africa on wikipedia? We so far have 69,000 articles tagged but we need all articles tagged and many new articles!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Not interested eh?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:34, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

There's a lot for Senegal and Morocco to transwiki from fr wikipedia. Not to mention Egyptology stuff. I'm aiming to transwiki the Gabonese ethnic groups this week anyway..♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:Morocco is practically non existant and should be using WP:africa templates. South Africa is separate I think but is active. But I think it could also use WP:Africa banners. Dunno, but it would be nice to see 100,000 African articles that's all.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:54, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

Sensorium (talk · contribs · block user)

Hi. do are you admin?, I don´t know 'cause you don't have the userbox in your page, I'm from , I know english and use it, but my name is ocuped for other person, so, I need migrate my use page, how you can help me?, please answer me in my page in --190.250.134.9 (talk) 15:48, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks you! i understand, I'm doing that you did say me, I'm goint to change my name--190.250.134.9 (talk) 19:06, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Calliopejen1. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 00:01, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Incomplete FfD

Please note that a nomination was never created for File:My-little-dog-Tupy.jpg. I have removed the tag. — Train2104 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

Nomination of List of marine biologists for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of marine biologists is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of marine biologists until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. bondolo (talk) 19:56, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Ascaridida

Fixed (image removed from blacklist) Bulwersator (talk) 20:39, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

You're invited! New England Wikimedia General Meeting

 New England Wikimedia General Meeting

The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future!
Potential topics:
Sunday, April 22
1:30 PM – 4:30 PM
Conference Room C06, Johnson Building,
Boston Public Library—Central Library
700 Boylston St., Boston MA 02116
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England!

Message delivered by Dominic at 09:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

es:Usuario discusión:Sensorium

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Los Altares (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Tehuelche
Los Altares Valley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Rawson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cary Grant

Hi Calliopejen1, I was wondering if you could weigh in at the above-linked FPC and note whether or not you are satisfied that the image is PD. Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Jen,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Sir Peter Ustinov Allan Warren.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 16, 2012. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2012-04-16. —howcheng {chat} 16:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

Talkback

Hello, Calliopejen1. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Map workshop.
Message added 09:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CMD (talk) 09:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

ITNR for elections

As someone who regularly contributes to election articles: Due to recurrent discussions that lead nowhere, an open-ended discussion and proposals are invited Wikipedia talk:In the news/Recurring items/Elections for ITN on the main page as to what should be recurrent without ITNC discussionsLihaas (talk) 07:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Administrator Interview.

Hello there, my name is Mohammad Alshanabla (You can call me Mo). I am a student at Michigan State University, working on an exploration of the Wikipedia admin-ship process. I would firstly like to thank you for agreeing to be interviewed. I am working with Jonathan Obar, who is the principal investigator on this project, and also my Professor for this course. I am posting this note on your talk page to confirm that I am contacting you to set up a time for an interview that would be convenient for you. Please let me know if you would like to be interviewed via Skype, or by email. My email is alshanab@msu.edu, if you have any questions what so ever please don't hesitate to contact me at any time. Thank you very much and kind regards, -Mo.

AaroHellaakoskibust.jpg

Fair enough, but there's not much I can do to save it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Calliopejen1, I took a look through the deletion log, and see that you do a lot of work with files, so I thought you might be able to help--I really don't understand licensing issues. File:UKISS doradora.jpg claims that:

  1. It is an album cover.
  2. It is likely owned by NH media entertainment and U-KISS.
  3. It was originally uploaded from a Facebook post
  4. It was released by the owners into public domain, from the website http://www.u-kiss.co.kr/.

This combination of facts seems entirely unbelievable to me. Why would a record company release the album cover or a promotional art work into the public domain? Also, I see no evidence on the target page that the picture was released. So, did someone just put that release there to hide it from those who patrol for deletions? Or am I missing something? Qwyrxian (talk) 03:32, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

My guess is that the user just has no idea about copyrights, and believes that everything posted publicly on the internet is "public domain". (Copyright cluelessness is common, and extremely common among users from South Asia--where this user seems to be from....) He could also be deliberately lying, but my experience is that there are more clueless people than liars (though of course there are liars from time to time). You were right to tag the images as missing permission. I would delete them myself now, but I'm not an admin on commons. Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:37, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks; that is what I figured, but wasn't sure if I was missing some subtlety. It was actually a different editor who tagged it as missing permissions, but hopefully that will take care of the problem on Commons eventually. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Imitation pearl, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Enamel and Sinter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Economic history of Colombia

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Economic history of Colombia, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://countrystudies.us/colombia/61.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 00:10, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Henry Conway

As a contributor to this article, you may be interested to know I have nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Conway. Robofish (talk) 01:53, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Communes of Morocco

Hey Jen. I wondered if you could do something useful with this and create a list of Municipalities and communes of Morocco? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:41, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Excellent! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Wow! Yeah I want to add them like Al Haouz Province and then create templates for the provinces. Whatever is easiest and quickest. They can be pasted from Italian wiki I asked for Plastikspork to do that but if you can do it just as easy! Added infoboxes to regions of Morocco, tomorrow I'll do the provinces and look into those communes.. Really the regions should be expanded, some are like 90,000 km2 and sub stubs! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Well I intend to add infoboxes to the province articles in the coming week so I'll add them then!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Wow! For having the amazing skills to make such lists as the Communes of Morocco! Whether its simple or not, I'm very impressed!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

Paraguay

If you're looking for a country that could stand some work, Paraguay's a good one to look at. There aren't even by-department categories for about half the country...leastaways not beyond the ones I've created over the past few days. And a lot of the articles are bloated and poorly translated, and need paring, pruning and categorization. I've been trying to put some of the categorization to rights over the past week, and I may be able to do a bit more today, but I'm not sure how much time I'm going to have for it.

(You being a Spanish speaker, I thought this might interest you - I cross-posted it over at Dr. Blofeld's talk as well.) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Stories Project

Hi!

My name is Victor and I'm a storyteller with the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Wikipedia. I'm chronicling the inspiring stories of the Wikipedia community around the world, including those from readers, editors, and donors. Stories are absolutely essential for any non-profit to persuade people to support the cause, and we know the vast network of people who make and use Wikipedia have so much to share.

I'm very interested in speaking with you about your work to combat systemic bias, especially with regards to women.

I'd very much like the opportunity to interview you to tell your story, with the possibility of using it in our materials, on our community websites, or as part of this year’s fundraiser to encourage others to support Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're inclined to take part in the Wikipedia Stories Project.

Thank you for your time,

Victor Grigas

user:Victorgrigas

vgrigas@wikimedia.org

Victor Grigas (talk) 21:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Liaoningornis

Yes, unfortunately the image is inaccurate in that it has euornithine-style tail feathers. Enantiornithes either have spaced pairs of long ribbon-like feathers or no tail feathers at all, depending on the species. Folding fans of vaned feathers are unique to Euornithes. Liaoningornis was originally classified as a euornithine so it may simply have become outdated. The description also weirdly lists it as having a beak for some reason, but I don't think that was ever suggested. In fact the reference image is definitely not the sole described specimen of this bird, not sure what that thing is... MMartyniuk (talk) 19:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

No idea on that one, not exactly up on my basal synapsids unfortunately. But given the date I'd play it safe and label it with a historical interest only tag. MMartyniuk (talk) 13:16, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of 1970s in science and technology for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1970s in science and technology is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1970s in science and technology until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of municipalities, communes, and arrondissements of Morocco (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Hassan, Tata, Tissa, Safi, Unknown, Dakhla, Zag, Zagora, Akka, Matmata, Tan Tan, Sabbah, Assa, Menara, Jebha, Tabia, Fifi, Tah, Sidi Amar, Lehri, Taourirt, Ain Beida, El Marsa, Sidi Mansour, Bouarfa, Oulmes, Tahla, Mediouna and Boumia
Race and ethnicity in Colombia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Campesinos and Creole
Economic history of Colombia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Audiencia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:25, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

User:Calliopejen1/WIP/Morocco communes

You can delete this now. Thanks!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

ogg

.ogg added to the list of valid file formats, thanks! Bulwersator (talk) 08:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

Babirusa

Reply here. Cheers, RN1970 (talk) 18:44, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

HI

What is the problem with the Image?

--Neogeolegend (talk) 11:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Ken Burns

Hi. On April 30, another editor removed the Ken Burns image you uploaded simply because he didn't like it. I've just restored it, saying that the image was perfectly fine, in addition to being fair-use, and that he should not have removed it unilaterally without any talk-page discussion. I thought you'd want to be aware in case you wanted to keep an eye on it and in case the user begins edit-warring. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 15:46, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

coca tea

coca tea
don't understand how wikipedia sends messages,but please read what I wrote that this bondeau deleted.I used exact reference numbers everywhere and she still deleted,y??? Paitalona (talk) 19:06, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

HighBeam: Email needed

Good news, you were approved for a free account. Bad news, your email is not set up to receive the code. Two options: 1) Go to Special:Preferences, scroll down, add your email and enable receiving messages; 2) email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and I'll respond with your code. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 15:46, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Calliopejen1. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Ocaasi t | c 15:58, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your work on Coca tea -- thank you! bonadea contributions talk 17:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

G'Day Calliopejen1,
First, thanks for the interest you have shown in the image that I had previously uploaded (see talk page posting) - however I would like to raise the following issues:
1) You stated in your posting to my talk page that your addition will most likely be deleted - but then go on to say that the image has already been deleted. In the future, please be more precise in your terminology; either the image is already deleted, or may be deleted - not both;
2) Next, you have deleted the image without attempting to contact me to ascertain the copyrights of the image. I find this quite brash, as you are essentially assuming that you are 100% correct, without allowing any possibility that you have made an error. While I am trying to be civil, such high-handed actions are not likely to be beneficial to resolving any disputes that will (inevitably) arise. In fact, in a more inexperienced user, it is likely to cause them to not to attempt to help wikipedia in the future - which is NOT to Wikipedia's benefit;
3) Lastly, the image you deleted does NOT infringe on any copyright. While I might grant you that I may have applied the wrong copyright label, or that the copyright standards in wikipedia have changed over the years that I have been (intermittently) editing articles, it does not change the fact that the image has not infringed on any copyright. Specifically, you will see that my image is partially based on the following image - however, if you dig deeper, you will see that the map from the Battle of Messines in actually only a partial image from the following image covering both the Battles of Arras and Messines. If you dig even further, you'll see that the map was originally produced by the Department of Art and Military Engineering at the U.S. Military Academy from 1938, and as such is public domain. (In fact, on both the images for the Battle of Messines and the Battle of Arras, they are both clearly marked as Public Domain.)
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Otherwise, can I ask for you to replace the image?
MWadwell (talk) 11:04, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

G'Day Calliopejen1,
Regarding the question you raised over knowing that the file is US government work - there are a number of ways that this can be determined. The first is by asking.... (VBG). Next, is by looking at the two wikipedia images (the maps of the Battles of Arras and Messines) created from the original map - both state that the images are public domain. Lastly, a 30 second check of the internet found this: Each map was originally produced by the Department of Art and Military Engineering at the U.S. Military Academy - i.e. West Point - in 1950. This collection was published as A Short Military History of World War I - Atlas and edited by T. Dodson Stamps and Vincent J. Esposito on the map index page of one of the websites hosting the maps.
Without being able to view the deleted image and view what sources were listed (i.e. did I list the usma as a source?), I don't know how obvious I made the copyright in this case....
MWadwell (talk) 20:36, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Feedback

Hi thanks for responding. It was satisfying to know that somebody reads my feedback. You were helpful; thanks again!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmed.mahay (talk • contribs) 20:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Image sourcing

TheOriginal BigMac (talk) 05:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC) Hello, Not sure exactly what needs to be done here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:YouYangs.jpg. Can you let me know please what I have to do to keep this photo in Wiki? I've added a comment is summary that it's my own work. Thanks TheOriginal BigMac TheOriginal BigMac (talk) 05:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia!  Adam Mugliston  Talk  11:41, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

German google translate

What happened to the translation link in the templates? much less useful now as I can't decipher anything and have to go out of my way to visit the article itself on de!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah that's the problem, Rich Farm tends to attract people trying to ban him because he makes bold edits.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

Talkback

Hello, Calliopejen1. You have new messages at Talk:Islam_and_domestic_violence.
Message added 17:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Can I restore my contributions now?

 Brendon ishere 17:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Sectional map

Calliopejen1, RE: Deletion of my map of the Yolo County Airport. Imagine it's late at night. You are flying a small aircraft, and you have engine trouble. You whip out your iPhone to try to find a place to land. Since you have deleted the only map that was on the page, the pilot, who is unfamiliar with the area, is now SOL, crashes and dies. If you want to put a better map up, fine. Having no map is NOT better than having an informative one. I'm a pilot. I've had friends die in situations like this. My judgement is vastly superior to yours in this regard.

I don't know why Wiki editors feel compelled to destroy things without offering anything in exchange. It's official. You're a waste of flesh. --Solidpoint (talk) 07:27, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The map in question is a sectional chart, published by the FAA, and instantly recognized as such by every pilot on Earth. How many more "helpers" like you will I have to educate to keep my work from being destroyed by utter incompetence? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectional_chart
Wikipedia, Gresham’s law in it's highest form. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/245850/Greshams-law

--Solidpoint (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Graph

This is wierd, I know I didn't upload that graph?--J intela (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Argentina

Sorry about the long delay, but I have just noticed the message you left at my request to copy edit the article Argentina. You are right, it is long, so I will decline the request for now and begin to make it shorter, and then request again. Thanks for pointing it Cambalachero (talk) 16:15, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Sure. You might have something intelligent to say here on the User:Jaguar section..♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:19, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

My Edit Undoing

Yeah sorry about that I just felt bummed out that I tried to work on a summary and it turns out someone already did it so I felt "why bother". I;m over it now but thanks for explaining it for me! :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bionicjellyfish (talk • contribs) 21:47, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

More Morocco

Hey Jen, can you use excel to create a template for each Moroccan province like Template:Al Haouz Province?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure, if you could programme the excel thing to be formatted by province in templates however you do it that would be great.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:38, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Amazing!! Thanks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

The Ghost Ship is a public domain film. Am i free to upload any images of the film then? If so, what license?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:37, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah I was sus about it too. I was just going to prepare the article for GA, that's all.♦ Dr. Blofeld 04:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Beauty And The Beast TNP.jpg

I just wanted to let you know that a file you nominated for deletion never actually made it on to the FFD for that day see: File:Beauty And The Beast TNP.jpg. I removed the old tag, but I thought you might like to resubmit it. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 21:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Jen,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Royal Wedding Stockholm 2010-Slottsbacken-05 edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 19, 2012. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2012-06-19. —howcheng {chat} 17:15, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

Translation templates

If you click corresponding article on Mantas Adomėnas it is a dead link to "topic bio"> I also noticed on the German or French template the google translation link is now blocked as its the corresponding article link. It was perfect at one point, what happened?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

EV?

Hello, I was just wondering about your meaning in the use of EV, in contexts such as the one below - as I never came across that before...

Comment I'm not really convinced of the EV in double entendre - even assuming people understand "let" (which I agree is not too hard) what on earth is "lodgins"? I'm guessing lodgings, implying he hopes she's a prostitute but this requires significant effort to make out, and in any event isn't an amazing pun. Not an easily understandable example of a double entendre for a contemporary audience. Also at thumbnail res (or even at image page res) it's not terribly easy to see the words at all, making it a poor illustration. EV is obviously there for Charles Williams (caricaturist) but I have no basis to think this a particularly

Thank you, Yellowish Lemon — Preceding unsigned comment added by YellowishLemon (talk • contribs) 02:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

It means "encyclopedic value" - which is one of the requirements at WP:WIAFP. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Finishing

Hello i see your enourmous contribution to the encyclopedia, im asking if you could finish the article of Ecuador's historical economy, thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.14.135.51 (talk) 07:17, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't have time to do any more research now, but I've expanded the end of the article somewhat. It still only takes us up until about 2002 or so... Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:28, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

Pyule

Dear Calliopejen1, What is the problem with my map of Jaugada and/or the Wadi Suq pitcher? The constant questions for verification of my photos, drawings and maps is a bother. It is so complicated to get to the right page, that it is much easier to upload a new image and repeat that I am the author. There is an extremely high rate of contentious negation of my authorship with Wiki. Regards, Pyule

Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Calliopejen1/Archive_9&oldid=1136752115"