User talk:Gay Cdn/Archive 3

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

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 9

Archives

/Archive table of contents

In regard to your message about several images, particularly that of Dink and Bonita from Goldfinger and the image of Jill Masterson (the one with the name spelled correctly), I don't know why you think they are "orphaned" as these images are clearly being used on the Goldfinger (Film) entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KenL (talk • contribs)

Thanks for nominating [:[Image:DurmstrangClothes.png]] for deletion. I did not know how to do this myself when I replaced the image. I actually posted on the Harry Potter Wikiproject images page that I would like it removed, but someone deleted this request soon after. By the way, was that message you posted on my talk page from some sort of template? If so, I am curious if there is a directory of such templates. --Phi*n!x

Volume 2, Issue 42	16 October 2006	About the Signpost

Wikipedia partially unblocked in mainland China	$100 million copyright fund stems discussion
Floyd Landis adopts "the Wikipedia defense" as appeal strategy	News and notes: Logo votes begin, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[[:Image:07840drw4.jpg|thumb|right|Image used in penetrant article, nominated for deletion by Gay Cdn for reasons unknown to Achim - Why?]]

Hello and Greetings Gay Cdn! Thanks for your note on my talk page. I noticed in the history file of the aforementioned picture that you nominated it for removal. Then you asked me to check and see why it would be nominated for removal. In response, I have absolutely no idea why you would nominate this jpg for removal. It serves a useful function in the article penetrant. I authored that article and uploaded this graphic for easy understanding and this is the first time anyone has commented about it to me. I'm afraid I must ask you, as the originator of this nomination what problems you have with these simple drawings. I await your response.

Sincerely, --Achim 04:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Oooops, I just realised: I think it's on here TWICE, under different names. Probably my mistake. If I remember correctly, it gave me an error message during uploading and then I changed the file name. Have a look at the article Penetrant  :-) --Achim 04:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I think you made a mistake: I didn't upload that picture of Gaston. Jienum 15:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

There must be some mistake. The only pictures of Gaston I uploaded were the ones you can see on his page. Jienum 19:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh for fuck's sake!! Just go ahead and delete ALL the images I uploaded. That way, it'll be a lot easier. Just play "Jienum Pic-Hunting", I don't give a fuck anymore! Jienum 20:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't delete my images, as I stated, I own the copyright laws for those. They are screen shots of the movie I am filming —Preceding unsigned comment added by Horrorfiend138 (talk • contribs)

why do you care? just leave me and the images i uploaded alone and stick to your own life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Horrorfiend138 (talk • contribs)

Great job in tagging for deletion all the extra image baggage Wikipedia has lying around. I can see you get plenty of "fan" mail for your efforts! Keep up the good work. -Regards Nv8200p talk 04:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do not post the images for deletion on the whim. Image being an orphane as of today is no reason to delete it if it is encyclopedic and copyright clean. It may be unused temporary and may get linked to an article at some point but if deleted and uploader not around or the source side down, it may be lost forever. By posting useful images for deletion you just add estra hassle to other users. If you see an orphane, first make a reasonable judgement on whether the image is usable and only after that post the crap for deletion leaving the useful images alone. TIA, --Irpen 15:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Per your comments on my talk page, the particular image you seem to be concerned with is Image:Egipetmost.jpg. That image was uploaded 9 months ago. From the image page, there is no way to tell if the image was ever used in an article. Perhaps this image was uploaded and then forgotten about, was uploaded again under a different name or file type or a number of other reasons. Wikipedia is not a file storage site, tho Commons seems to be. While I will admit to not knowing much about the subject of the image, in order for someone to use the file, they would have to a) know that it is here and b) do a search and the file name (at least to me) is not very discriptive of the content.

Is it possible someone may want to use this picture, is it possible that the image became orphaned by vandals, is it possible it should be loaded to commons? The answer to all the above is yes and to prevent the immediate deletion, the uploader is notified and the IfD remains open for 7 days.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 17:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

This is all fine and dandy if there is a policy clause that unused as of now images have to be deleted within that many days even if they are usable and copyright clean. I don't remember seeing such a policy clause. I may be mistaken though and I would appreciate your pointing this out to me.

Also note, that some users log in less frequently than once a week.

Finally, resorting to the WP:NOT "storage site" clause when discussing clearly usable and encyclopedic images is a straw man argument. --Irpen 17:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I added the image as sort-of proof that he did narrate a Mt. St. Helens documentary, because shortly after I had made the first edit mentioning that fact, another editor removed it citing no proof. If you look at the Matt McCoy page, more specifically, its "Trivia" section, I posted an Internal Link that directs users to that photo. It is a screenshot taken from the documentary's opening title sequence.

Let me know what you think.

Srosenow 98 21:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Volume 2, Issue 43	23 October 2006	About the Signpost

Report from the Finnish Wikipedia	News and notes: Donation currencies added, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the update on the photo for Denny mendez. I need help in properly loading this image. Can you help me out? (copied from email sent to me. Replied on talk page) -- XLR8TION

I looked it over, and while the article there was significantly cleaner and slightly more fleshed out than the original, the fact remains that there was no substance suggesting why it merits inclusion in Wikipedia, so I renominated it. Thanks for pointing that out! Mo0[talk] 01:14, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

The photo can be removed from Wiki as I already uploaded a clearer version of the photo. TrackFan 19:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out to me. I believe I modified the image in some way, and used the modified version in the Brian Stack article. Nightscream 02:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• You can go ahead and delete it. It used to be part of a custom userbox on my user page, but I streamlined the boxes and got rid of most of the custom ones. Thanks for the notice :) Danny Lilithborne 09:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I got your message, and yes, please delete my orphaned pics. See i must have messed up while uploading them. thanks. --MaskedRiderGatack 15:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I got your msg as well, but I never uploaded the pic. Thanks anyway. Doc502 04:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

– ClockworkSoul 04:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

We meet again! :)

Those two images that were somehow marked "Orphaned" were actually images I had uploaded and then later used as an internal link reference to the "St. Helens" film article in which I also created. They're used under the "Factual errors contained in the movie" portion of the article, where it makes mention of KOMO News photographer Dave Crockett. Somehow, when I'd uploaded those (and my previous Matt McCoy image), they were never shown that they had been linked to from their respective articles. A glitch, perhaps? Srosenow 98 08:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

According to wiki, if you believe an image should be deleted, you should "discuss" it with the contributor - which have clearly not done in the case of an image I contributed and you have tagged inappropriately. I can understand the need to remove excess or inappropriate images but are you qualified to make that judgement without consulting others? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.194.6 (talk • contribs)

I am more then willing to discuss a nomination of an image. As you have not signed in with a user id or given a file name, I am unable to address any issues. Please note that I am not an administrator and as such I can not delete any image. You could start a discussion on the image talk page and I would be able to converse there as I monitor the pages I nominate for deletion. If the image was nominated via the IfD process, you can start discussion at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion under the nomination. Unless further information is provided, this is the limit of my response.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 21:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

May I request my two orphaned pics to be deleted since I won't use them anymore, and I have uploaded an updated pic. Thank you.--MaskedRiderGatack 23:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

You may be interested to know that an RFC has recently been initiated regarding Fair use images of Canadian politicians. Please feel free to participate in what I hope will be a fruitful discussion. - Mcasey666 05:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Volume 2, Issue 44	30 October 2006	About the Signpost

Wales resigns chair position as reorganization underway	Hypothetical valuation of Wikipedia scrutinized
Work underway to purge plagiarized text from articles	Librarian creates video course about Wikipedia
Report from the Japanese Wikipedia	News and notes: Commemorative mosaic started, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reasons: Block on 198.103.184.76 converted to anon-only. You should be able to edit. Sorry for the trouble! Request handled by: Luna Santin 21:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello. Im the creator of the DAATH article, and i hope you are proud to know I re-hosed the bands album cover imgace from a reliable scource. (limewire). hit me bak sometime.

I finally put the image in the Ratchet and Clank Article. Apparantly, I uploaded it, had to leave home for a few hours, and forgot all about the image. Abby724 23:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I wanted to delete that image but couldn't remember how. (I was able to create a superior image later, and so orphaned the one you just deleted / will delete). Again, thanks. -- Solberg 21:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Solberg

I received a message from you regarding three images that I had uploaded to Wikipedia that are orphaned: Image:KBZK_logo.jpg, Image:KXLF_logo.jpg and Image:Kejr-kmoh-logo.jpg. You have my blessing to speedy delete all three. The first two were once used in articles, but were superseded by better images, and the third I uploaded, but then reconsidered due to poor image quality. There is a fourth image that I had uploaded and has since been superseded by a better-quality image: Image:KNAZ-2News-logo.jpg. You also have my blessing to speedy delete it as well. Thank you for your diligence. dhett 02:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Is currently used in Links Incorporated. Thanks for your help! ---- Bearly541 talk 08:14, Saturday November 4, 2006 (UTC)

Okay, then speedy delete the image in question, but leave the Image:Linkslogo.gif image alone. I think I double uploaded an image for Image:Links_Logo.gif, so please feel free to speedy delete that. ---- Bearly541 talk 5:40, Saturday November 4, 2006 (UTC)

Sorry you deleted those images ([1]). I couldn't respond in time, but if their orphans, I suppose their wasn't such a hurry? Too bad... maybe leaving some extra time when asking for deletion for such "orphaned images" (I suppose someone deleted the link in a page) would not be a bad idea? Lapaz 21:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

You removed a tag on the AfD for Military Brat on the AfD discussion, but not on the actual Military brat page. Is this AfD closed? If so, could you delete the announcement on said page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balloonman (talk • contribs)

Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 45	6 November 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration election campaigns begin	Blogger studies Wikipedia appearance in search results
Intelligence wiki receives media attention	Report from the German Wikipedia
News and notes: Foundation donation, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, did you know that your username is against the rules under WP:UN?

"Names that refer to or imply sexual acts, genitalia, or sexual preference including slang, innuendo, and double entendre"

I don't really care but I was wondering if you knew. Voretus^talk 16:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is wrong with it? There is not much more to say other than it is a logo. aido2002 20:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I know that nothing is wrong with the image. I was asking what is wrong with the rights claim. The template tells why, nothing I need to say. Don't re-add the template to the page unless you still want to talk about this, I'm going to remove it for the time being. aido2002 23:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I didn't know it wansn't being used, I have benn taking a Wikibreak lately. That's all you had to say, go ahead and delete it. aido2002 23:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It was actually placed on Nov 2 because that's when it was nominated for deletion. You can check the history of the image to see for yourself. I would suggest to you that it is placed back on Nov 2 and not Nov 8. Thanks. Roguegeek (talk) 22:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

To whom it may concern,

Hello, this is Shadeed A. Kelly. I'm just getting back online since I took a month's time off from the internet. I haven't upload any images for almost a month and a half. I don't even know who uploaded a new Merv Griffin Entertainment logo. I'll find out. Thanks! King Shadeed 21:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

The images you notified me about are now tagged db-author with the exception of my personal one which is now in use.--Dakota 02:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Can I ask where you got the advice to tell people to tag images {{db-author}}? The csd criteria has quite a clear meaning for that, which no longer in use is not part of. "added by its author and was mistakenly created" --pgk 08:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

This file may be deleted.

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Matthew Fenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 14:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Rationale now provided.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 15:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Quite pathetic you had to go thtough my upload log tagging images I uploaded as retaliation tbh. Matthew Fenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 15:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Hold on.. I know you from the JerichoLOE.. :\ Matthew Fenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 16:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Whatever.. I'll AGF and give you a clean slate. Matthew Fenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 16:28, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

It's pretty much manual. I stick thirty messages into a new article, copy the table of contents, and turn them into links using a text editor (with a few regular expressions). ed g2s • talk 17:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)