User talk:Melesse/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Image speedy deletion

I asked the following at the help desk, but as some one there quite rightly pointed out, it's probably better to ask you direct. (You can reply here, I'll watch):

I'm confused about what has happened here. An image which I uploaded, Image:Bernhardt Skull.JPG has been deleted with the rationale: "Speedy deleted per (CSD I8), was an image available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons. using TW." However, so far as I can see, that isn't true. The closest a Commons search picks up is this (right) which isn't bit-for-bit identical, at all, since the deleted image was "landscape".

I don't suppose it really matters at the moment: so far as I can tell the image was orphaned anyway. It's certainly no longer needed on the page I originally uploaded it for. I just don't understand the reason for the deletion, nor the disadvantage in retaining a public domain image on Wikipedia which might be used at a later date. AndyJones (talk) 12:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, like you, I didn't see the point in keeping an orphaned crop of an existing image. Melesse (talk) 00:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, I suppose. But I don't think "didn't see the point in keeping it" is one of the speedy deletion criteria. AndyJones (talk) 19:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletions against policy

It is a violation of policy to speedy delete I8 images which are protected. Please reacquaint yourself with the CSD policies. Also, do not delete any I8 images with {{do not move to Commons}} templates on them. Remember, not all images that are moved to Commons are moved there correctly. We are losing a lot of images because of people moving them to Commons and then people on Commons deleting them because they do not fit Commons policy. I don't know how many {{do not move to Commons}} images you've deleted, but please be more careful in the future. Kaldari (talk) 15:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the assist

I appreciate the assistance on squaring away the image info. :) - Hexhand (talk) 16:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Johnwoodstock99.jpg

According to your edit summary I (the uploader of the image) was notified 48 hours prior to the deletion. However, I received no such notification. If you had left a message on my talk page I would have gladly clarified any flaws in the Fair Use rationale. NSR77 ^T_C 16:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Dispute: (Image:Evan.Olson.9196.jpg)

Hi, you left a message indicating this photograph "is being used under a claim of fair use." In fact, we LoveCat Music are the copyright owner of this photo and of all photos we post on Wikipedia. We will never need to claim fair use because we own all rights to the photos. (Randyfx (talk) 17:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC))

Dispute: (Image:Cesar_Mora_pic_from_HacerloBien.jpg)

Hi, you left a message indicating this photograph "is being used under a claim of fair use." In fact, we LoveCat Music are the copyright owner of this photo and of all photos we post on Wikipedia. We will never need to claim fair use because we own all rights to the photos. (Randyfx (talk) 17:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC))

Help with image?

Melesse, I thought I had the correct license and justification for an image I included, but it seems to have been deleted anyway. It looks as if I should have asked for your help after all. What might I need to do to restore it, please? Corgi (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

What image would that be? Melesse (talk) 01:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Dispute: (Image:AngelTearsSebastianTaylor(left)&MomiOchion.jpg)

Hi, you left a message indicating this photograph "is being used under a claim of fair use." In fact, we LoveCat Music are the copyright owner of this photo and of all photos we post on Wikipedia. We will never need to claim fair use because we own all rights to the photos. (Randyfx (talk) 17:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC))

Then you should put a proper free-use license on them, not a fair use rationale. Melesse (talk) 01:11, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no option to "put a proper-free use license". When we "Upload Image" a CD cover, the only option is in "an article about the album/single's artist, used to identify the artist's work." This links to page heading "Uploading a work that is not free content, under a fair use rationale (cover of a music album or single)". (Randyfx (talk) 15:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC))

Delete

Can you delete Image:ShakerHeightsNeighborhoods.jpg for me, please? I created a PNG version which is now on commons. Thanks, Spencer^T♦C 21:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair use issue

Hello! You have recently delete the Image:Playboy Magazine January 1990.jpg that I uploaded (cover of Playboy for Joan Severance), you may pronounce at the deletion of fair use images in the biography of Kareena Kapoor, for consistency. Regards, Sdrtirs (talk) 16:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Use of CSD#16 when a Fair Use rationale existed

Hi Rettetast and Melesse —

This really isn't that important, since I had only logged in to blank my user page anyway, but I saw your (Rettetast's) notice that you were going to delete the image for the Son House article because "there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use." You note that "in addition to the boilerplate fair use template, 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."

(Well, actually I can't quite tell if you wrote this or a bot, since this "opt out" link at the bottom is for bots, but I'll guess that it's a bot using your account).

Melesse then deleted it per WP:CSD#16.

Now, since I don't edit here any more, I don't care one whit about the image, but for the record (pulling up the deleted article), the content on that page was:

date=July 20 2008
Son House

{{{Non-free promotional}}}

Photo © Richard Waterman (unknown date: 1960-something).

The image linked here is claimed to be used under fair use as:
*it is a historically significant photo of a famous person.
*the image is only being used for informational purposes.
*Its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article, which is a biography of this person. 
*The photo has already been featured as a CD cover, [1], and is thus counted as promotional.

— Asbestos | Talk 12:03, 22 Apr  2005 (UTC)

[[Category:Images of people]]

From what I can tell from WP:FURG, this is a valid Fair Use rationale (although a little dated compared to the number of rationales expected these days), and, whether or not the rationale was valid, there was some Fair Use rationale. Therefore, speeding it due to WP:CSD#16 was entirely inappropriate, as far as I understand.

I'm guessing, but correct me if I' wrong that you (Rettetast) or a bot are just finding all images with FU tags which don't also include {{{Non-free use rationale}}}, and are automatically tagging them and leaving messages without looking. Then you (Melesse) are deleting without looking.

That may be entirely wrong, and I'm assuming good-faith and know that you're not doing anything maliciously. I also, as I said, don't much care about old images that I uploaded. But if this kind of thing is happening a lot, then there are probably hundreds of images that have been speedily deleted which really shouldn't have been.

All I'm suggesting is that a little more time gets put into your administrative decisions (all of which should be taken with care), and not to rely completely on bots and WP:TW and other such programs that can't actually read the content of the works they're suggesting you delete.

Of course, one other possibility, which I understand would be way above your payscale, would be simply to replace a faulty or non-existant FUR with one of the many pre-written ones, such as {{{Album cover article rationale}}}, which is generic and works for all album covers. It wouldn't take any more time than deleting it does, and has the added benefit of actually making the encyclopedia better, instead of removing images from articles just because they used a rationale that was considered acceptable three years ago.

Thanks, — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 17:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Image deletions

Melesse, please be more circumspect about your image deletions. As an administrator it is your responsibility to evaluate the merit of CSD claims before acting on them. Many of the images you have deleted recently have been within our policies or only required trivial work to bring them within policy. Why not put forth a little work to fix them rather than deleting them? There are no barnstars for deleting the most images the fastest :) Kaldari (talk) 18:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:NewShazam1.jpg

I got your message about my Shazam picture and I think I got it all correct, please let me know if there is anything else I need to do. I only have it on Freddy Freeman's page because of the recent activity in comics with him and its by the part of the article it makes sense with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tigerklinge (talk • contribs) 04:05, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Trump_International_Hotel_and_Tower_(Chicago)

Can you give me your opinion on Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Image_workshop/Archive/Aug_2008#Trump_International_Hotel_and_Tower_.28Chicago.29_floor_diagram? How do you suggest getting a diagram?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I already did, didn't I? If nobody will actually do it then that's unfortunate, but there's not much I can do about that. Melesse (talk) 05:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vlcsnap-6674973.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Vlcsnap-6674973.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

RE: Replaceable fair use Image:Davidtrackinginstudiodisturbed.jpg

Could you possibly clarify what you mean to me? --The Guy _complain ^edits 00:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Please Check

Image:The_Boulevard_Aug_2008.jpg I have added what you have requested, please let me know if this is acceptable.

I have tagged Image:The_Boulevard_Aug_2008.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 00:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Phantasy Star EotM cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Phantasy Star EotM cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:More Powers To You title card.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:More Powers To You title card.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Resolution of non-free images

Hi Melesse - I figure you're the editor most likely to know the answer to this question: didn't there used to be a policy that non-free images couldn't have a resolution of higher than 300 px on either dimension? All I can find now is subjective stuff (i.e. resolution can't be higher than it needs to be and can't compromise the copyright holder's ability to profit from the image). I ask because the uploader of this image, which I tagged for reduction and you reduced, has questioned me on that. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 03:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

The 300 thing isn't really documented anywhere anymore because it was just a rule of thumb to make sure images would be under 0.1megapixels. Here's discussion on it. Melesse (talk) 05:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

IMO, there was no reason to reduce that image as only a small portion of the image was copyrighted (90% of it was a screenshot of Wikipedia which is GFDL). The portion of the image which was actually copyrighted comprised about 52,000 pixels which is well below the 100,000 pixel rule of thumb. Kaldari (talk) 18:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!

Hi,my name is Gab_95 and I created the article about Telenorte and I wanted to put the logo of the channel used between 2000 and 2001.I coudn't put the logo and you come and helped me! Thank you so much.Gab 95 (talk) 12:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Resolution of non-free images

Excuse me, but I think your "nazi" comment here was a bit unnecessary. Melesse (talk) 00:58, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, it was meant to be humorous (thus the strikethrough), but it was in poor taste. I have removed it from the comment. Sorry if I caused offense. Kaldari (talk) 15:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Colberg_t

Hello, I noticed you deleted this picture. I have received permission from the individual in question to use the picture. Can you please undelete it? Geoff Plourde (talk) 14:56, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Please follow the instructions here and someone else will help you with that. Melesse (talk) 06:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Question

Why whould copyrighted images have a low resolution? Fangusu (talk) 02:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Part of the non-free content criteria states that images must respect the owner's commercial opportunities. If images have a high resolution, they could be reproduced more easily, undermining the owner's ability to make profit. Melesse (talk) 06:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Images FUR > FURME

Hi there. I just noticed that you've updated the fair-use rationales on certain images that I uploaded. I wanted to thank you for doing so. Let me also take this opportunity to confirm with you if this is the typical way I should be FURME-ing related image uploads. Cheers. Mspraveen (talk) 03:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Not sure exactly which images you're talking about, but yes, the way I did it is standard, the two required fields (the ones at the top) must be filled in and you should fill in as many of the recommended fields as you can (though none of them are necessary). Melesse (talk) 06:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Took the words right out of my keyboard. Thanks too for the updates to [[Image:PDALogo.png]] and others. Davidelit (talk) 04:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I notice you also used FURME to edit the fair-use rationale for Image:Siyaya-kokoba-town.jpg. In this process you seem to have deleted some information which was on there. If this was intentional please can you explain why. If not, please be careful when editing using javascripts and make sure that the edits are what you intended. Thanks. AstroMark (talk) 11:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)