User talk:Mahagaja/Archive 21

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mahagaja. 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 15

←

Archive 19

→

Edit Vandal- Block IP

68.3.89.36 vandalized... please block.

I gave him a warning. You don't block someone just for writing "Poop" once. —An gr 09:41, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:TKaczynski.JPG

No. I did not take the photogrpah myself. If claimed authorship due to the fact that i cut the picture. Perhaps it has been mislabeled.Maziotis 21:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I can't find the original phot where Ted Kaczynski is escorted by two police officers, and I don't know how to label the photo. Perhaps you could help.Maziotis 21:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

There was an image of T. Kaczynski whose rights belong to AP, but it was taken out because it was considered to be a violation. I don't know if there is any picture available that we can put. For sometime there was the mugshot picture but it was considered in the discussion page to be undignified, and therefore unaproprited, to be put in the top of the article. Now the picture is put in the section where it is discussed the prisoner's arrest.Maziotis 11:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to restore that AP photo. It was deleted because Counterexample 8 at WP:FU#Counterexamples says "A photo from a press agency (e.g. Reuters, AP), not so famous as to be iconic, to illustrate an article on the subject of the photo" is not allowed, but I think that is intended to refer to living people for whom a freely licensed photo could be made. Since Ted Kaczynski is likely to be in prison for the rest of his life, it's not really reasonable to expect that a free photo of him could be made. —An gr 20:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:SMScontroller.jpg

Hi, I just received your message about the Image:SMScontroller.jpg used in the Sega Master System page. This image is unreplacable. There are countless pics of similar controllers, but there are none quite like this one. The wires showing up at the top and side make this pic one of a kind.

Now when I submitted the photo a year ago, I believe I was adhering to the fair use standards since the original website was specified and the admin of the site does not mind. I am willing to change the license. But if it has to be deleted, I am certain I won't be able to find a replacement. Please let me know what is the next logical step. Thanks. Starze 04:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, policy and in particular how the policy is enforced has changed over the last year. I'll discuss the specifics of the image itself at Image talk:SMScontroller.jpg. —An gr 20:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture deletion (Shana Haji)

Hello Angr,

I hope you can help me understand something better:

I helped Hamid123 with the article on Shana Haji, from which you have deleted the photos. I have read the discussion on deletion of fair-use images, and assume that is the reason for the deletion. In order to use the photos, do we need the permission of Shana Haji, or the newspapers the photos were from, or both? If we are able to obtain permission, how should the photos then be labeled?

Thanks for your help. Emma-trobairitz 15:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Both images were deleted as replaceable fair-use images. In general, fair-use images of living people aren't allowed on Wikipedia, because it's possible to make freely licensed images; see Counterexample 8 at Wikipedia:Fair use. In order to use these images, you'd have to get the copyright holder to release them under a copyleft license like GFDL or one of the Creative Commons Licenses CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. Take a look at WP:ERP for some examples of how to word your request--the important thing is that "permission to use on Wikipedia" is not good enough. —An gr 20:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! We will do that. Emma-trobairitz 13:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Brandeis Images

Why did you delete them? I explicitly indicated that I had permission from Brandeis for their use and was awaiting a Wikipedia confirm number?

These images and the articles that contained them represented quite a bit of work which you have carelessly undone. I'm in the processes of restoring them now.

Thank you. Alight 19:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you give me the exact names of the images you mean? —An gr 20:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Scientific Peer review

This project is not very active. You can give it a try, bit I would go to the normal Peer Review. I plan to try to clean up the Scientific Peer Review stuff soon. --Bduke 07:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. —An gr 07:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi! I couldn't help but notice that you again made a Wikipedia article worse. Please stop that. It's really kinda' annoying. And, uh, counter productive?

Since this is a bigger picture kind of thing, I just feel like I've tried common sense. I've tried rationality. I've tried just about everything to get you to stop making Wikipedia articles worse... and it hasn't worked. So, instead of edit warring, which just ends up with someone counting to three or something, I'm going to go ahead and WP:IAR on that article, and that image, because, you know, you're being really, really unreasonable about it. And if this is the image .. if this is the one that you feel so strongly about, you want to take it to whatever the next level of dispute resolution is, then great! But please stop making Wikipedia articles worse.

Also, I kind of feel like you're deliberately going through every contribution I've made to Wikipedia, and, you know, eliminating it. Which, of course, would be a violation of WP:STALK. So, you know, I'm asking you nicely to please stop that.

Jenolen ^{speak it!} 13:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope, you were the one who made a Wikipedia article worse, by replacing a free image with a fair use image. Doing so repeatedly after being warned is grounds for blocking, so consider this your first warning. —An gr 13:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

So, as an admin, you're supposed to uphold the policies of Wikipedia... except, apparently, the ones you don't like. I made a case for that edit -- WP:IAR CLEARLY states that if the rules are getting in the way of making an article better, ignore them. They were. I did. The current image is NOT as good as the official state portrait of Governor Granholm, and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks it is. While I admire your adherence to a rigid and unflexible set of beliefs, at some point, common sense must enter in to the picture, which is exactly why WP:IAR is OFFICIAL POLICY. Not a guideline, like WP:FU ... OFFICIAL POLICY. When you became an admin, you promised to uphold it. You broke that promise. And that wasn't just a promise to me... it was a promise to all Wikipedians. If you ask me, you owe them an apology for the level of disrespect you've shown me.

But you know best, right? You - not the community, not the vaunted consensus that's supposedly the backbone of this place... you and you alone will determine these matters? It would be funny if it weren't kinda sad... And really, at the very least, you should recuse yourself from acting as judge, jury, and image executioner in this case -- have someone else take a look at it. You can hardly be said to be an impartial participant in this matter.

One other note -- I've never been "warned" before. Is there some kind of scoreboard somewhere, where I can see what level of warning I'm at? How many warnings do I get before I'm in "trouble"? When is it upgraded to "serious trouble"?

I am very serious about WP:STALK - it's just so, so uncool, and it kind of seems like you're in danger of becoming the vindictive admin who uses his powers to pick on certain editors. I really want you to think about that before you continue on your current course... You really, really need to cool it with the Wikistalking. And I don't think it's at all wrong for me to say to you, you should consider this YOUR first warning.

Jenolen ^{speak it!} 13:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

But you didn't. You ignored the rules to make an article worse, and no amount of good faith can persuade me you didn't know you were violating policy when you did it, and did it on purpose to see what reaction it would get, meaning you're violating WP:POINT as well as WP:FUC (which incidentally is also official policy). WP:IAR means you can pay more attention to the spirit than to the letter of the policies, it doesn't mean go around intentionally violating policy to get a reaction. If you started POV pushing in articles, and edit-warring to restore your preferred POV, do you honestly think saying "WP:IAR is policy!" would keep you from getting blocked? This is no different. As for the warning, there is no magic number of warnings you get before you get blocked. People get blocked when an admin decides they're being disruptive and it becomes apparent that blocking is the only way to stop them for a while. If you do continue to replace free images with fair-use ones, you will evenutally be blocked -- and probably not even by me. And if you seriously think I have nothing better to do than stalk you, you have significantly overestimated your importance. —An gr 14:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, WP:STALK specifically states "This does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors or violations of Wikipedia policy". —An gr 14:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

assessment system, wikiproject template, etc etc

Hello Angr,

You contribute a lot to Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages and related pages. I left a note on the project page about an assessment system etc. This would include a template similar to {{Ethnic groups}}, to be added to the talk page of articles related to languages...

I was thinking of making one for the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Endangered languages, but it would be kinda silly for the child project to have an assessment system while the parent doesn't.

Any thoughts? Your input appreciated.

--Ling.Nut 18:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I think assessment systems are silly. I want no part of it. —An gr 19:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

OK :-) --Ling.Nut 19:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Marijuana

please dont add marijuana, which is north american slang, to the Cannabis (drug) article, as it only paves the way for everyone else to add their slang terms. I might add that in the UK not only is cannabis not known as marijuana but that marijuana is a term for herbal cannabis whereas the majority of cannabis consumed in the UK and western europe, amongst other places, is actually hashish, yet hashish is cannabis as well...hence the problem, to which the only solution is to stay with cannabis. Thanks, SqueakBox 02:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Marijuana is not slang. Just because a word isn't used in the UK doesn't make it slang. Pot, weed, reefer, etc. are slang. Marijuana is the normal word for cannabis in North American English. —An gr 05:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you source that? (I think it is importnat, esp what the authorities call it). Cannabis as a drug is commonly smoked as resin in the UK and for us to claim thaty cannabis as a drug is only herbal (ie marijuana, weed or whatever) is simply untrue and at the heart of my stance on this debate, SqueakBox 18:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

See the sources I gave at Talk:Cannabis (drug) for the word "marijuana" in official, formally written documents, including government reports and academic journals. —An gr 18:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

SMScontroller picture

Hi, I have replied with a proposed new license in Image talk:SMScontroller.jpg. I believe I am supposed to get an approval or disapproval of the license. Please let me know what you think. Thanks. Starze 05:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Parkwood, Philadelphia

You also made a duplicate article at Parkwood, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Making duplicate articles is both undesirable (because edits that get made to one don't necessarily get made to the other) and unnecessary, because redirects allow multiple titles to link to the same article. I've replaced the contents of Parkwood, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with a redirect to Parkwood, Philadelphia. —An gr 14:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.....appreciate the help Shoessss 14:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

User talk:WarthogDaemon

By random chance of browsing everywhere, I came across a cabal case that I was apprently a part of (though I never recieved a notice since the requester spelled my name wrong). The mediator posted a message at User talk:WarthogDaemon instead of my talk page. I've moved that comment into my archives (since I've already archived most of December) and put up a CSD:G8 up on the talk page, but thought I should personal ask someone to delete and what I've done so there won't be any potential confusion later. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience. -WarthogDemon 20:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Someone already beat me to it. —An gr 20:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Persons/people

You recently added comments to the discussion on the Person article, supporting my objection to User:Lucy-marie's changing of 'persons' to 'people' without justification. User:Skapur suggested, I think not seriously, that the article should be split into two - one for British English and one for American English. Having received one comment supporting her, from a friend, she has done precisely that so that there are now two new pages Person (British English), Person (American English) and the original Person page has been made a REDIRECT to Person (disambiguation). At the head of the discussion page for each new article, she has written "The page was created to resolve a dispute over the use of the words people or persons." Now, clearly the 'dispute' was never resolved and certainly was not going to be resolved in her favour in any case, though I was prepared to wait for more comments. I have now nominated both new articles for deletion, with the original article to be restored. I would be grateful if you would give your views in the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Person (British English). Emeraude 10:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

VezinaHasek.jpg

Hey there, you deleted Image:VezinaHasek.jpg on January 3 under RFU criteria (I7 or some such I think). Anyway, I placed a tag saying it was not replacable because it was a photograph of Hasek's Vezina/Hart trophy victory. Hasek was the first European goalie to win both in the same season (winning both in the same season is considered a prime feat in the NHL, and a sign of sheer excellence). Is it possible to undelete this image? Thanks. --Wafulz 04:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've undeleted it. I probably didn't notice your dispute because it wasn't on the talk page, which is where I usually look to see if nonreplaceability has been disputed. Sorry about that! —An gr 04:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Usage of Burma/Myanmar as name of a Wikiproject

Since I know you're very experienced in Wikipedia, I want to ask you a question. I was wondering whether usage of Burma/Myanmar does not follow neutral point of view conventions. A user recently proposed a name change to exclusively "Myanmar" (a name change made in 1989), but most English-language speakers recognize only Burma or use Burma in preference of Myanmar. Naming convention policies seem to indicate that usage of both is preferred, but that user writes that using Burma is not neutral, because it shows support for Burmese opposition groups. So, my question is, "Which name should be used for the Wikiproject, 'Burma/Myanmar', 'Burma', or 'Myanmar'?" The lengthy discussion can be found here. Thanks! --Hintha 04:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture

I don't understand why I can't upload a picture of me, in my personal collection. I release all rights to the reproduction of my image by myself! Fishhead64 08:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

You can! You just have to tag it {{PD-self}}. —An gr 11:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Artificial snow.jpg

Hi, you deleted File:Artificial snow.jpg. First of all - *please* notify creators of pages (and uploaders of pictures) when you delete, or mark a page for deletion. I was not informed that this picture was up for deletion. Second: you didn't remove its link on the page Snow. Third, did you mark this page for deletion, or did you just delete it? Was it a speedy deletion case? You said its replacable - would you care to find one to replace it? I've looked all over the place for a comparable picture (as in a picture at that magnification) of artificial snow - its very difficult to find.

I realize theres a lot to answer in there, but please bear with me. Fresheneesz 04:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

You must have been aware that the picture was up for deletion since you edited it after the {{Replaceable fair use}} tag was put on it. That is a speedy deletion tag. I didn't remove the link from Snow because there's a huge backlog of replaceable fair use images waiting to be deleted, and if I removed them all from the pages where they occur I'd never get through them. Third, an image is considered replaceable if a free image could be made that conveys the same image, even if such a free image has not yet been found or made. I believe that's the case here. —An gr 06:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, i'm absent minded and multi-tasking - I didn't realize it had a replaceable fair use tag on it. And if I did, I didn't realize that is a deletion tag. Anyways, I think the "could be made" wording means "could practically be made". I don't know anyone with a snow cannon, and am not gonna buy one. Also, it would take some nice magnification equipment to get a close up shot of snow like the picture showed.

Making a picture of it is therefore unfeasible, unpracticle, and "cannot" be done. The intent of the picture was to differentiate it from the symmetrical snow crystals that form naturally. I would ask that the picture be restored temporarily and listed at WP:IFD. Fresheneesz 06:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the thing about Wikipedia is you don't have to do everything yourself. You can request an image by putting {{reqphoto}} on the talk page; you may be surprised to find that there are Wikipedians with access to a snow cannon and magnification equipment. If you think the deletion was out of order, feel free to list it at Deletion review. —An gr 06:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll try the reqphoto template up on the snow page, but i'll still list the picture for review. Thanks. Fresheneesz 19:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

My edit to: Talk:American_english

Hi. Sorry for trolling, but it wasn't actually indended as a troll edit, I was being serious. What is the correct way to say something like that? Keshidragon 20:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Saying that American English isn't "normal English" and that "it is not actually English" is trolling: saying something deliberately provocative for the purpose of getting a reaction out of people. In addition, Talk:American English is for discussing the article about American English, not for discussing how things are done at Wikipedia. If you really want to understand Wikipedia's spelling guidelines, please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling). If you want to comment productively on them, please do so at their respective talk pages, but making snide remarks about American English and/or nationalistic remarks about British English is not going to make people want to listen to you. An gr 20:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for the link, it was all I really needed. I will try and speak more productively from now on. I currently don't have much experience in talk pages (see my contributions page), and thanks for the advice. Keshidragon 01:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

"caoineadh"

Hi, Angr. Sorry to bother you with this, but on the Banshee article, the IPA pronunciation given for the word caoineadh is [kʷi.ɲu]. Judging from the Irish orthography article, however, I would expect the pronunciation to be [kinʲə] or something similar. Since you obviously know a great deal more than I do about this, though, I thought I'd ask you before changing it. Thanks, --Miskwito 00:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Ivory Coast move

Since you participated in previous discussions on Ivory Coast, you might be interested in the requested move at Talk:Côte_d'Ivoire#...Requested_move. — AjaxSmack 06:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Possible vandalism

No... I just live in a college dorm where I leave my computer on my desk. I'll go change my password anyway though... Thanks for the heads up. (I came back with a girl last night and kicked my roommate out, he was probably fairly upset.) RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 16:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh well... I've taken some security precautions on my computer to make sure it won't happen again. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 20:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Image Deletion - Mike Gregory

The darts player Mike Gregory is a notoriously difficult player to obtain either a free image or even to take one ourselves. I possibly agree with the reasoning for deleting the Eric Bristow photo, but File:Mikegregorydarts.png I don't. If someone is virtually in hiding, has no website, no contact info how are we to obtain permission to use his image? I grabbed a screenshot from a tv show on which he appeared and thought I'd put the correct fair use reasoning on the description page. Should I upload it again? Seedybob2 12:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

If he's really reclusive, you're probably right that the image isn't replaceable by a free image. Nevertheless, the text of {{Tv-screenshot}} makes it clear that TV screenshots are only to be used when discussing the TV show, not just to identify the person. If you can find a promotional image of him that was released when he was competing, that could be used, with a detailed fair use rationale explaining (among other things) that a free image couldn't be made because he's a recluse. —An gr 13:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Sons of Erin

Angr, I fear that I may ave breached copyright on this [1]. I thought I had permissions to upload it. I know that copyright images are one of your specialities. Please delete it. Thanks. Cornhat 15:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. —An gr 16:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please delete...

Hi. Could you please delete the page AT&T Wireless so I can move Cingular Wireless there, and move the edit history and talk pages along with it? Thanks. aido2002 00:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... The situation is very confusing, and there are some things that need to be cleaned up. But, thanks for moving the article, we can now try to fix it. aido2002 04:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

German car number plates

Hello Angr, Once again I need your help!

User:ThorstenS has contacted me and asked for help regarding commercial external links on German car number plates, a page he has spent a lot of time on. Here's a copy of his message:

Hallo IsarSteve, in letzter Zeit gibt es wieder Probleme mit einer kommerziellen Internetseite, die ihren Link dort hinterlässt. Ich habe mal den Abschnitt "External links" aufgeräumt und Einträge von nicht mehr aufrufbare Seiten gelöscht und die Zulassungslisten durch die deutschen Wikipedia-Pendants ersetzt. Es gibt für mich keinen Grund mehr, warum "germanplate.net" und Co sich unter den "Ext. links" verewigen müssen. Auf der Diskussionseite scheinen die auch nicht den Sinn der Links zu verstehen. Wie denkst du von den Ereignissen der letzten Tage? Könntest du ebenso einen Blick auf den Artikel German car number plates haben (->Beobachtungsliste)? Ich komme mir etwas "verlassen" vor. Danke und Grüße -Toshi 19:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

My question is, is there a way to permanently block this commercial link?? I would grateful if you could give User:ThorstenS some tips, as I'm not sure what to do apart from continually deleting. I've also deleted the link occasionally, but I bet you have an answer!

I will mentioned to him that I'm going to speak to you about it ! thanks --IsarSteve 20:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know of any way. I've encountered blacklisted links on other Wikimedia projects, where the page won't save if it includes a link to a blacklisted site, but I've never encountered it at en-wiki. All I can think of is to watchlist the page, keep removing it, and block whoever keeps adding it (or semiprotect the page if the link is continually added from different IP addresses). —An gr 20:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

thanks for the help--IsarSteve 21:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC) don't get blown off course tonight :o)

thanks again for watching out! --IsarSteve 14:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted image

Why did you delete the image , your explanation: "replaceable fair use" isn't very easy to understand? I thought it would have qualified as fair use as it was a small image (resolution) and it was being used on his biographical page. Nzgabriel 01:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Our fair use guidelines and policy (see especially counterexample 8 on that page) don't allow fair use images to be used when all they do is show what a living person looks like, because it would be possible for someone to create a freely licensed image that conveys the same information. —An gr 08:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Meta vote

The vote in support of closing the "Siberian" Wikipedia is mine. —An gr 08:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I've seen your vote on the question. Since I live here, I know the right answer for sure. But I'm curious about your opinion on such a case.

In particular, they have opened the section by referring to something, and nobody in wiki foundation has questioned if the language/dialect exists at all. Well, maybe they gave a glance to the materials, but... why not ask an expert? Voting is necessary to check if anyone is interested, but not for a proof - what can mean a vote from an unknown web user?

Actually, if the message seems messy, I'm just inviting for a conversation. --Ъыь ^(mailbox) 23:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't doubt that spoken Northern Russian dialects exist. But I've seen no evidence that they have an established written standard, which for me is a prerequisite for having a Wikipedia. I know that there are already Wikipedias in other dialects without established written standards (including many German dialects, as well as Asturian Spanish and Walloon French), and if anyone nominated them for deletion I would support. The fact that this particular dialect Wikipedia seems to have been started for political/ideological reasons (much like the variant Belarusian Wikipedia, which is still in testing at Incubator) is an even stronger reason for me to support its deletion. —An gr 23:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:321.jpg

Hi. You deleted File:321.jpg (as replaceable fair use) but did not remove the link to it on Nada Surf. I hope you are going through and removing such links, and that this is just one that has slipped through the cracks. - Mark 16:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I remove links to the images I delete unless (as is currently the case) there's an enormous backlog of images in a category. At the moment Category:Replaceable fair use images is eight days behind where it should be, so when I'm working on clearing it, I don't waste time removing the links to the images. —An gr 16:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ancel Miyamoto Raynal.JPG

I'm kind of confused here... it was decided that this image should be kept, provided that it be reduced in size. I uploaded a smaller version and added the "fair use reduced" template, and then OrphanBot said there was no rationale for fair use. You then removed my template, but kept the "no rationale" one. What's going on? Is it breaking Wikipedia policy or not? Thanks, Purple Sheep 22:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You just have to write a fair-use rationale for it, preferably under a ==Rationale== heading. Keep in mind OrphanBot is a bot and looks for obvious things; it can't read the talk page to see if the rationale is there. —An gr 22:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks. It just seemed a bit pointless to add fair use rationale when it appeared to already have it in the template at the top, but I've read all the fair use guidelines now. Purple Sheep 13:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:JK Rowling.jpg

Hi Angr, you recently deleted Image:JK Rowling.jpg because it was tagged with {{Replaceable fair use}}. However, it was also tagged with {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}. However, the discussion never got to exist because it was deleted. Just wondering the rationale behind this action? Best, Fbv65e del / ☑t / ☛c || 23:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The image had already been tagged for deletion for 11 days when the "disputed" tag was added (not counting the one you added and then quickly removed yourself), and was still around for 3 more days after the tag was added. If anyone had wanted to discuss it, they had ample time. The comment left in the "disputed" tag said simply, "The only way to find a freely-liscenced image of JK Rowling would be to personally ask her permission. As yet no one seems prepared to do this", which is not an argument for the image being non-replaceable. A free image could be made, therefore the image is replaceable. The fact that no free image has yet been found or made is irrelevant. —An gr 23:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I see. The fact that no free image has yet been found or made is irrelevant is where I think the FU policy is at fault, but this is not the place to talk about that. Thanks, though. --Fbv65e del / ☑t / ☛c || 00:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Style guidelines for sound pages

Hello, Angr. Recently CyborgTosser and I discussed and came up with proposed style guidelines for all the individual consonant and vowel pages wherein the Occurrence section would have a table rather than a bulleted list. You can see the discussion here. So far nobody else has commented on the proposed guidelines and I believe it's safer to get a solid consensus before undergoing the work to change so many pages. If you could comment on what has been proposed, even if it's a simple yay or nay, this would help us out quite a bit. Thank you very much. Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 06:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I have Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Phonetics on my watchlist, so I followed the discussion as y'all were having it. Looks fine to me. —An gr 10:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Signature removed

Hi, Thanks for removing my signature from the page I updated (sun and northwind)...I spend more time on the reference desk/talk pages and just keep adding it without thinking! Thank, ny156uk 11:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Image Deletion - Peter MacNicol

I recently noticed that on the Peter MacNicol article, you deleted the picture of MacNicol portraying Larry Fleinhardt on the TV show Numb3rs. THe picture that you deleted stating that it was not fair-use still appears on the Larry Fleinhardt article. Therefore, I recomend that you have some consitency with non-fair use image deletion. We are however having a hard time finding fair use images because most images of him are screecaps from Ally McBeal or Numb3rs. -Diabolos 21:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The image is fair-use at Larry Fleinhardt because it depicts the character, and no free alternative could be found to depict the character. It's not fair-use at Peter MacNicol because a free image could be made to depict the actor. —An gr 05:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Top picture in Ted Kaczynski's article

it was agreed that the "free image" is not appropriate to be at the top of the article; please see discussion page. If there is no problem with the "fair use" picture, I don't see why the article shouldn't have one.Maziotis 10:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The "fair use" picture is from a news agency, making it a violation of fair use criterion 2, as specifically exemplified by counterexample 5. —An gr 10:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thnak you for explaning that. I think the article should have a picture at the top. Perhaps we can find a third picture, which is both appropriate and legal to use.Maziotis 12:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:P28260BPWIR.jpg

You deleted this image for the legit reason of I7, but you failed to remove the link to it from Mark Arm. I'm sure you're aware that it is highly discouraged to delete images without deleting their reference. -- Zanimum 16:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Usually I do remove links to deleted images. However, when the backlog of images awaiting deletion is as big as it is now, removing links is just too time-consuming. —An gr 16:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd recommend asking Signpost and Wikipedia Weekly to ask admins to join this cause. -- Zanimum 19:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Remove image red links for images you delete

Hello. I messaged you a few days ago (above) about your deletion of an image without the removal of corresponding red links in articles. I had another glance at your deletion log, and was appalled to see that you are continuing to delete images without lifting a finger to remove red links to images from articles.

Even if there is a back log, it is far more time-consuming trying to find and delete such image red links after the media have been deleted than to do it at the time, as you go. If you don't have time to do the job properly, you shouldn't do it at all, unless you can get someone to finish the job for you.

I went through your last 200 deletions, checking each one for remaining red links. Out of those 200 deletions, you created image red links on the following 95 pages:

Please stop deleting replaceable fair use images for a while, as you go back over your past deletions, checking each image page for file links and deleting any red links. I went as far back as Image:Andrew ranger.jpg. - Mark 07:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. Getting rid of improper images is far more important than removing red links from articles. I can't believe you went to the time and trouble to find all these cases of me not removing red links and didn't just remove them yourself. There are a very limited number of people who can delete images, and extremely few people actively engaged in doing so, but anyone can remove red links. —An gr 07:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I should have clarified, I removed all of those red links above over the past 2 hours. - Mark 07:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, when you click "delete" on an Image page, you receive the following prompt:

Check "what links here" before deleting. For images, check the file links and remove the links from all articles. It is your responsibility to do image deletions cleanly and not leave broken links and red boxes in articles.

That is fairly straightforward, I think. - Mark 07:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleting PSG CAS Image

May I know the reason why you have deleted psgcas_logo.gif from PSG CAS ?. I would like to know, how I could recitfy that and get it right this time. Thanks User:Guruparan18

The image was deleted because it had no copyright information. —An gr 13:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Image: Justin Guarini

The image removed was proved free by Guarini's management, and documented on appropriate pages. There is absolutely no merit for it's deletion. If you do not replace the picture, I will. If we continue to be harrassed, I wish to speak to someone in authority over you. I've been polite dealing with this repeatedly, but enough is enough. NOTE: See below for the updates that were included on required discussion pages days ago.

Update:

Response to image challenge: Free license approved.(Confirmation below that image in dispute is free) Note: Below info was posted on Image page by Guarini's official site webmaster, per Guarini's management representative. Bkstone 00:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

-Summary

Promotional Photo of Justin Guarini. Photographer: Christine Cain-Weidner www.cain-weidnerstudio.com Email: [email protected]

File is freely available at JustinGuarini.com http://www.justinguarini.com/images/jblue.jpg

-Licensing {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}

-Follow-up: Please remove the image challenge noted on article page and here. Image has been proved free. Bkstone 01:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Bkstone 17:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Responded at Image talk:Justin Guarini Promo Photo Blue.jpg. —An gr 18:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Response copied from Image talk page:

Response: Wiki is a complicated maze of different links and pages to provide info. The info was provided here (by Guarini's representative), copied onto my discussion page where the first notice of deletion was posted, and provided on the Image description page I can no longer locate. I am not tech savvy enough or have time enough to study Wiki's overly complicated system, and no amatuer contributor should be expected to when what has already been provided clearly shows the image meets the guideline "anyone can use it for any legal purpose, including commercial uses and derivative works". I think it ridiculous to once again bother his rep with something like this. This relentless cycle of changing demands for documentation feels like faux legal nit-picking, if not harrassment. I can either bother Guarini's rep again or replace the image, I haven't decided. However, I might want to discuss my concerns with someone in a position of authority over you.

Please tell me who else I can discuss my concerns with, if I feel inclined to do so. Bkstone 19:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Please tell me who else I can discuss my concerns with, if I feel inclined to do so. Bkstone 19:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

(Note: copied from image discussion page)

I suppose the best place to take it up is Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. —An gr 20:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Response: Thanks, but looks like another merry-go-round. Is there no direct contact w/ a supervisor to get a reply concerning the latest condition (gratis vs. libre)? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but the image has been discussed and "resolved" numerous times w/ decisions changing at the whim of various admins. (Note: Entire history of various requirements/compliance is missing from this page)

deleted Image:Carole E Handler.jpeg

Why was this picture deleted? It belongs to Handler and she approved of its free use. It even said that on the image page.Juda S. Engelmayer 00:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

It was deleted because it is a fair-use photo of a living person. Wikipedia policy does not allow fair-use photos to be used to show what a living person looks like, because a free equivalent could be made; see the fair use criteria and counterexample 8. The fact that she gave permission is irrelevant; Wikipedia does not use copyrighted images by permission, because our content has to be reusable by others, even if permission has not been granted to them. —An gr 08:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Nişantaşı

Could you please explain me WHY you deleted the Nişantaşı photos I added?

One of them was taken by my best pal.

Anyway, some people need to get a life. Shuppiluliuma 01:28, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

They were deleted because you uploaded them under a fair-use claim, and Wikipedia policy doesn't allow fair-use photos of public places because a free equivalent could easily be made. If one of them was taken by a friend of yours, however, you can ask him to release the photo under a free license (see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators), and then it can be undeleted and used. —An gr 08:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

fair use

Hey, if the Michelle Kwan article can use her olympic picture, I don't see why Johnny Weir can't. Awartha 08:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

It can't. Michelle Kwan's Olympic photo should be deleted too. In general, Wikipedia policy doesn't allow fair-use photos to show what living people look like, because a free equivalent could be made. —An gr 08:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

William Randolph Hearst (disambiguation)

Sorry for the the temporary confusion at the above article, a move is under way. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 19:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

IPA for Imbolc

Hi Angr, could you perhaps look at the Imbolc article? We have a user going through some of the articles with Irish (Gaelic fests in general, Brigid) and either changing the IPA to phonetics or adding new phonetics and translations. We could use some input from someone with better grasp of translations and IPA. Tapadh Leibh, ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how "Imbolc" is pronounced, but the suggested etymology looks more like folk etymology to me, so I removed it. —An gr 20:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

There is scholarly debate about the meaning of all the festival names. I have only a miniscule bit of Gaeilge, but AFAIK the pronunciation is "IM-uhlk" or "IM-olk". But, yeah, I need to learn how to do that in IPA :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

There's probably at least three pronunciations: (1) the Old Irish pronunciation, (2) the Modern Irish pronunciation, (3) the pronunciation used by English-speaking Wiccans who know nothing of Irish phonology. Odds are all three are quite different. —An gr 20:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. IMHO, the former two are worth including, the latter not. I'll try to do some work on standardizing these when I get a chance. IIRC, the articles are currently under the most commonly-used name, which is generally Old or Middle Irish (but it varies... some are incorrect, but common, semi-Anglicizations). Then somewhere in the article is usually the etymology and some discussion of the various forms. The amount of etymological material in the articles varies widely, and I've had to trim it a bit in some of the articles because earlier forms of those sections were unweildy and off-putting to non-linguists, imho. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I think all three are worth including, if all three can be found. In fact, I can't find any evidence for a modern Irish word for Imbolc, so in this case #2 doesn't seem to exist. It's an Old Irish word borrowed wholesale by modern-day English-speaking Wiccans, so only versions 1 and 3 exist. AFAICT the word died out in Irish. —An gr 20:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

csd g4

Recreation: Image:Mary Pride.jpg and Image:Marypride.jpg. — coelacan talk — 03:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't quite qualify; it wasn't recreated after deletion, it was a duplicate that should have been deleted under CSD I1. Anyway, it's tagged now. —An gr 13:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)