Majorslavedriver
|
St. John's relics
editThat's a curious note you added to the article. Where did you get this from? As far as I know, incorrupt relics are never parted out as bones might be. Or are you speaking of relics such as vestments, etc? TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Vestments, but I do know of churches that have tiny particles of St. John's right toe. -Majorslavedriver 00:27, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose that makes sense. Isn't that foot the only part of his body where there was decay? My own family is blessed to have received a piece of his original coffin and one of the red Paschal eggs he had kept. The egg I'm actually holding until my younger son, who is named for him, is old enough to keep it on his own.
- By the way, I was looking over your recent addition of an article on Archbishop Anthony of blessed memory, and I noticed the text was a cut-and-paste from the ROCOR website. Do you have rights to use it here? Wikipedia has certain licensing requirements for copyrighted material, as I'm sure you've noticed with the images you've uploaded that have been deleted. If you didn't write the original text yourself, it's going to have to be rewritten with new material, and it needs to be phrased in a more encyclopedic fashion anyway. I'm adding one of the standard "welcome" templates here, which contains a number of links to policies, style guidelines, and help files for Wiki markup that you might find useful. I'll also be happy to help you with image licensing requirements so they can be kept around. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for looking out. The author of the article Fr. Peter Perekrestov gave his kind permission. I would feel uncomfortable rewriting Fr. Peter's article, but if you want to? --Majorslavedriver 01:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Someone has to do it, and it might as well be you. I'll do it if I feel up to it -- although I have great respect for Abp. Anthony I know little about him -- and if not me than some other anonymous person is perfectly free to.
- Did Fr. Peter supply the photos too? (I assumed so from the brief notation on the image pages.) And is he aware of Wikipedia's licensing requirements? If he gave permission for Wikipedia only, we can't use any of it. Text has to be available under the GFDL; images under either the GFDL, the "by" or "by-sa" Creative Commons licenses, or anything less restrictive. There are legal reasons why Wikipedia needs to be strict about this wherever possible, but many potential contributors are very uncomfortable with it. Then see WP:COPYREQ#When permission is confirmed for how to notify Wikipedia that appropriate permission has been given.
- I know this seems like a pain, but as I said my goal is arrange matters so that nothing gets deleted. You may already need to re-upload a few images as it is. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
License tagging for Image:Inla.jpg
editThanks for uploading Image:Inla.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Episcopalhawaii.jpg
edit
Thanks for uploading Image:Episcopalhawaii.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Mark_of_Ephesus.jpg
edit
Thanks for uploading Image:Mark_of_Ephesus.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Fortelizabeth.jpg
edit
Thank you for uploading Image:Fortelizabeth.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shell babelfish 16:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
So how is it an OS map?Geni 20:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Innokenty.jpg
edit
Thank you for uploading Image:Innokenty.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shell babelfish 07:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Unspecified source for Image:Korchinsky.gif
edit
Thanks for uploading Image:Korchinsky.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jusjih 02:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
