User talk:OsamaK/August 2008

Vandal

I had to vandalize your page and update the counter to six. It was just to tempting. And then my good nature came in and made me revert myself. I'm a bad person! DeluxNate (talk) 12:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Toothworm

Hi, Osama. Hordaland asked me if a picture of "toothworm" can be uploaded. The original was a carving made in 1780. The toothworm picture is visible at several websites. Here is one (at Creighton University Medical Center website). I don't know enough about the Wikipedia image policy. Can you help? Axl (talk) 22:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Osama! I just barely manage contributing to Wikipedia itself, and don't know how to do Commons. Do you think you could upload the image with the information you have? Thank you very much. (I'll watch this page, as well as Axl's and my own.) --Hordaland (talk) 12:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Bot should not be editing talk pages or their archives

Old talk page comments, and talk page archives, should not be altered with new images. They should appear as they did when the discussion took place. Stop editing the talk pages. It would seem to be utterly pointless anyway. —Centrx→talk • 07:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Asked uploader, [1]. There would seem to be little to no advantage to converting every image to Commons, especially given that the Commons image has been deleted in the past. —Centrx→talk • 08:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Note my first message was me in "danger, emergency, stop" mode, but then I looked into the issue and thought the bot not so unreasonable; and, aside from other possible better solutions, noted that the image was uploaded at the time for a "special" reason. Fare thee well! —Centrx→talk • 15:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. No further objection from me. —Centrx→talk • 19:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

In the future please refrain from editing my comments. As I was specifically referencing my uploaded version of the image. This is a discussion that has been had in the past and a consensus was previously reached on more than one occasion.-Crossmr (talk) 16:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

You deleted my photo inappropriately

Image:RalphRubio.jpg

As written, It is a screenshot from KUSI news. Orphaned OsamaK 12:11, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

It was NOT a screenshot. It is an actual photo I took at the TV station where I work. I took the photo, I held the copyright. I released it into Public Domain so it could be used on Wikipedia.

At the time I added it to Wikipedia, there may not have been a "I release it into Public Domain" tag available in the licensing section. I used whatever tag was available which appeared to be appropriate.

Return the photo.

Phil Konstantin

OsamaK isnt an admin, and as the deletion logs show, he didnt delete it. —Reedy 15:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:RalphRubio.jpg

I am still not completely convinced, but until proven otherwise I restored the image. Garion96 (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Django_default_page.png

Both you and another user are apparently somewhat confused about this image. It is a screenshot, taken in Mozilla Firefox, of the default page of the Django web framework. Firefox and Django are both released under certified open-source licenses, so I'm somewhat stumped as to what sort of copyright violation you think has taken place there. I've further uploaded a new version taken in Firefox with all visible extensions disabled, so as to ensure that not even a hint of the existence of non-free software exists in the image. If this is insufficient please provide a rationale whose basis is in copyright law. Ubernostrum (talk) 23:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

SCRNDUMP.GIF

This is a screendump which is not part of wikipedia. It is there to permit a reasoned discussion of a problem with some Olympics pages on the village pump. If you read the blurb, it says the image should be deleted at the end of August. Please wait till late Aug 31 or early Sep 1 before deleting it and then do delete it. -- SGBailey (talk) 21:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:4.13 Dream.jpg

No, it's supposed to look like that. Avant-garde, but still the cover. Zazaban (talk) 08:06, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why it would be any different from any other album cover. Zazaban (talk) 08:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

You can change it if you like, I would personally prefer to leave it as it is, at least for now. Zazaban (talk) 08:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

If it was just a text logo I might agree with you. But it isn't it's the name of the album and its position on the a white cover and as a whole is considered album cover artwork and therefore needs to have a licence (non-free album cover) and a fair use rationale to reflect that. --JD554 (talk) 18:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

what do you mean i can't use fair-use images in user namespaces?

how are we supposed to make a temporary page without including the images? Kevinkph85 (talk) 00:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)