A Sextet Short of PG(2,57)

Welcome!

Hello, A Sextet Short of PG(2,57), and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Getting Started
• Introduction to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ceoil (talk) 05:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. A Sextet Short of PG(2,57) (talk) 09:52, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, thanks for the edits to Christus' Nativity. Nice to see someone with other sources in hand. Welcome to Wikipedia, btw. Victoria (tk) 21:28, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Cheers Victoria. Nice article. A Sextet Short of PG(2,57) (talk) 06:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

A Sextet Short of PG(2,57), you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi A Sextet Short of PG(2,57)! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! SarahStierch (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Rogier van der Weyden - The Altar of Our Lady (Miraflores Altar) - Google Art Project (reduced).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Rogier van der Weyden - The Altar of Our Lady (Miraflores Altar) - Google Art Project (reduced).jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Stefan. I've made an edit on the page saying why I think the file is not replaceable. I don't recall the Fair Use Upload wizard I used making an issue of this for works of art and I don't for that matter see why it should be an issue (indeed the wizard generates an automatic "n.a." for artworks in this field). At any rate I couldn't find any free replacements and I doubt there are any i.e. I doubt the Gemaldegalerie where the work is situated permits photography. I think that's very unlikely given the age and delicate condition of the work.

I really do want you to understand Stefan that this is time out of my schedule dealing with this. I made time for it in the first place because I think making these works of art, which are emphatically in the public domain, should be available to everyone. The Visual Arts Project bent over backwards complying with Commons demands that the images should be frameless, to the extent of actually doing without the image from their article, of major importance for the period, for a full six months or more until I spent time deframing it, not a trivial task because where the panels ended and the frame began had to be researched. And now I have to spend more time defending a Fair Use rationale for a much reduced image showing how the panels look in their frames, and that of a Google Art Project if you please image available all over the internet and which the Gemaldegalerie certainly would never contest.

Get a life Stefan. This is as technical a copyright issue as can be and you should know it because you evidently spend your every waking hour vetting these images. But I'm too busy to spend every waking hour of my life likewise editing Wikipedia, and frankly if these are the hurdles I face I'm not going to bother.

I shan't pay any attentions to your future contributions here and I will delete them peremptorily. In short you may as well not come back. And if you ever do delete my files based on these minor techicalities expect to see me retiring my account. A Sextet Short of PG(2,57) (talk) 11:35, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Gravy train

if Wikipedia are prepared to fund me with one of their travel grants I'm willing to have a go. I believe I was here first. Its a nice crop though; sorry to see that discussion happen.Ceoil (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's pretty annoying when you spend time on something to be undercut like this, especially when the Upload Wizard didn't bother itself about repalaceability and where that anyway seems to be some sort of Wikipedia self-imposed condition which as far as I know has nothing to do with the legal position of Fair Use.

However, water under the bridge ... I shall get back to Dieric Bouts some time, presently one is rather deeply esconced in the Fair Division of objects in threes and may be away a while ... I'll mainly be doing maths stuff in this account. Might contribute to Wikepdia' coverage of perspective some time. A Sextet Short of PG(2,57) (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Made me laugh too. If you can get money from the WMF or whomever to travel to Dresden please take a nice pic of van Eyck's Dresden Triptych while you're there. Or stuff one of us in your suitcase! It was a nice image and also sorry about that. I might pop by the Bouts page - have some sources for it. Victoria (tk) 19:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Dresden Triptych looks another nice article. Will have a good read when I have time. Unexpectedly busy at the moment. A Sextet Short of PG(2,57) (talk) 02:15, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Just drpoped in to offload a few images. Away for a while now. A Sextet Short of PG(2,57) (talk) 20:23, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading the images! Enjoy your time away! Victoria (tk) 20:28, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

• I'll appeal at a later date when I feel moved to edit on finite geometries and encryption schemes based on them. Presently I'm a bit busy. Just joining in there for a bit of laugh really. In what way was I abusing the account? I was supporting (ironically I confess) the nominating editors involved. We are all hugely amused by this drama here not at the Victoria and Albert Museum. Unfortunately our director has just slapped our wrists fairly sharpishly, so we will probably have to cease and desist. Well, I sympathise with you all - I don't really have a life either. All the best. A Sextet Short of PG(2,57) (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2014 (UTC)