Wikikiwi

I might as well forget about WHAT?? Do I know you? Alter Ego 13:38, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Stills from the movie

Hi Wikikiwi, Usually it's other people asking me where I got the images from, whether there is a copyright infringement involved or whatever. This time I seem to be the fastest to ask. Mind you, I personally think it's perfectly okay to use them; I'd just be interested to find out about your source. All the best, KF 14:34, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Under what circumstances would posting those images be a breach of law? Wikikiwi

I don't know. Well, never mind. No one else seems to complain about the images. --KF 16:39, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

What is fake about Otto Hermann Kahn? Maximus Rex 13:45, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hello. If tutti frutti is written with a lower-case f in the article, then the same should be true of the title. Gratuitous capitals are not generally used in Wikipedia article titles. (I moved it.) Michael Hardy 01:00, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Interesting pages

I moved your "Interesting pages" article into your user namespace and of course also fixed the link, as you created it in the main namespace by accident. If you want to use personal subpages these are named like this: [[User Wikikiwi/Sandbox]] - you forgot the "User" before it. andy 22:49, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Tertium comparationis

Regarding your note to me, I think the examples are a little wordy and complicated for what is a pretty simple concept. As for what is left: I would prefer replacing the Donne poem with a shorter example (or removing it entirely), or at least making the text of the tertium comparationis of the Donne poem sound nicer (I'm not satisfied with my attempt). I removed the "Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity" example because a) there were already enough examples b) the tertium comparationis originally stated ("futility") wasn't quite correct, and c) wikipedia policy as discussed in meta:Should Wikipedia Use Profanity seems to be to avoid profanity unless needed. Any one of those and I would have kept the example, but in light of all three, I decided it was easier to remove. Do you agree? Nuffle 11:46, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It seems I don't agree with you. When I came across the tertium comparationis page (by chance--I think it was a "random page") I was fascinated by what I thought was a perfect page. There aren't too many of those in Wikipedia. So obviously I hate anyone who starts tampering with it. But of course you can go ahead, I've still got the old version. And really, there's a whole article on the f-word, so let's not be hypocrites. As it happens, I seem to be defending "pornography" here as I just added the Tutti frutti screenshot--again. I can't see anything terrible about that either. Wikikiwi 22:06, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:Dexter&Cheryl.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 04:09, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Favorite Songs

My survey has changed. I am now continuing my mission for the best songs, but now I am accepting all genres. I'm giving you a chance to revote for your top ten favorite songs of any genres (not just classic rock which is still the best). I've made a executive decision to keep the existing survey results and just add on to that with the new entries. My feeling for doing this is because classic rock is the most influential genre in music currently so it should be expressed more in the survey. Thank you for contributing in the past, and hopefully in the future. ROCK ON. RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 03:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

P.J. Sparxx image

I see you restored the DVD boxcover of P.J. Sparxx to her article. Unfortunately, that's not a fair use of the image. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Porn stars#Acceptable sources of fair use photos for more information. Tabercil 18:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The Top 100 Crime Novels of All Time

(replying here too, just in case you're not watchlisting my talk page. -- nae'blis 15:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC))

Hi, the more I surf around here, mainly on the literature pages, the stranger it gets. Just now, reading through Crime fiction, I found a link to The Top 100 Crime Novels of All Time and realised through the edit history or whatever it is called that you have deleted the list becuase, as you say, it is a copyvio.

Is the list of works written by one author (say, Shakespeare) also a copyvio?

Nope; what happened was I edited out the full list, which was compiled by the publisher, the Crime Writers' Association. A bare list of crime novels by Raymond Chandler could not be copyrighted, as it contains only "facts" (like a list of the biggest cities in the world, or whatever). IF this list was compiled by public vote and the reports simply tallied with no editorial decisions, then maybe we could include the full list, but it's probably not necessary, when including 3 or 4 examples would make a better narrative for the article, rather than just a list. The "book that was not a book" on the list, for example, is very interesting and could/should be added back in.

I can't imagine that the two books mentioned in The Top 100 Crime Novels of All Time have only two to three pages each (which contain those lists).

Not sure what you're saying here. I didn't do any editing of the rest of the article, so if it doesn't make sense now selected information can be added back in. My concern that day was clearing out several "Top 100" pages so I was a little quick with the edit; see Rolling Stone's "The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time" for a good example of how this can be done more seamlessly.

My questions:

1. Were these lists written by one author (whose copyright would be violated if we published them in Wikipedia)?

That's a good question. The article seems to indicate that it was collected by the CWA from its members, and doesn't say if there was editorializing beyond counting the votes. They would own the copyright, I expect, if anyone did, on said list.

2. In the two Crime Companions, is there an article on each of the novels? If so, all we would publish is a table of contents. And I've come across several in Wikipedia.

Unfortunately I haven't read them, so you'd be better off asking on the article's talk page (or perhaps better yet, Talk:Crime Writers' Association.

Wikikiwi 15:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Good luck, and thanks for asking me to clarify. This is not my area of expertise, but copyright violations are a Big Deal^TM. -- nae'blis 15:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

New Project

Hello! Recently I've started a project WP:CRIMINAL that aims to improve articles relating to criminals, including serial killers and others, particularly their biographies. If you are interested please join this project and help! Thank you! Wooyi 04:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Waiter!.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Waiter!.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Dexter&Cheryl.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Dexter&Cheryl.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:02, 11 January 2010 (UTC)