Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:45, 15 October 2009

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Misplaced Pages:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

• Archive 1 (September 2 2005 to November 7 2005)
• Archive 2 (November 7 2005 to January 8 2006)
• Archive 3 (January 10 2006 to March 10 2006)
• Archive 4 (March 11 2006 to May 1 2006)
• Archive 5 (May 2 2006 to June 23 2006)
• Archive 6 (June 23 2006 to August 5 2006)
• Archive 7 (August 5 2006 to October 31 2006)
• Archive 8 (October 31 2006 to January 30 2007)
• Archive 9 (January 31 2007 to March 21 2007)
• Archive 10 (March 13 2007 to December 1 2007)
• Archive 11 (December 1 2007 to December 24 2008)

Happy holidays!

I hope all is well, Jkelly, and that you have a wonderful holiday season and a great rest of 2008! Cheers, Iamunknown 09:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Jkelly! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for any and all contributions to this freepedia. If you decide that you need help, ask Krampus or just reach for a beer. Please remember to, um, you know, and all that sort of thing. RS good, OR bad. Sock it to your readers! -- Hoary (talk) 23:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

re roberto calasso - same answer as on my talk page: sorry, my evil twin grabbed the steering wheelPilobola (talk) 21:05, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Really nice to see you again

It seems like you've been gone for years, and I've just noticed you back again. I missed you! It just always brings me pleasure to see you editing, or to see you dealing with other editors in your fantastic gentle, respectful manner. I think you were the first administrator I "met" here, and you've set a benchmark for editing that I've yet to see surpassed.

That's all, I just wanted to say hi. All the best! Fuzzypeg★ 12:43, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

No content in Category:Suspected Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of User:ZoguShqiptar700

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of User:ZoguShqiptar700, by another Misplaced Pages user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Suspected Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of User:ZoguShqiptar700 has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Suspected Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of User:ZoguShqiptar700, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 04:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Jkelly was inducted into The Hall of The Greats

Overdue - you have for years done a lot of great work on photography. The inscription is in the description]]. --David Shankbone 15:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Final version

As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 —  21:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Christianity

My edit to the Christianity page wasn't a test. I meant it as a serious edit.Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 00:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Communitychannel

Hi, I am trying to get two files (http://en.wikipedia.org/File:NT_Bus_stop_Say_Goodbye_scene.jpg and http://en.wikipedia.org/File:NT_vlog_general.jpg) accepted by OTRS into commons. I have put the ticket numbers onto the respective pages but haven't heard from any OTRS volunteers since I did that. I admit I am fairly new and I may be missing a step, but I believe that copyright permission from the author has been proved (sent to permissions-commons@wiki) and I have done what I am supposed to. I would greatly appreciate your attention/guidance. Thanks, ----aaftabj-- (talk) 16:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Question

You are listed as the uploader of this file. I'm curious how you came by it. My father, a psychoanalyst, has a copy in his office (8x10). I need to ask him where his came from, but I'm curious about your source. Thanks. PalMD (talk) 18:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content/Archive 41#Unknown copyright holder?

Jkelly,

I'm asking your advice on the issue of NF pictures where the copyright holder is unknown. I see from the archive that you removed the "where possible" from this requirement in the NFC criteria. I'd like to know if specifying the copyright holder is a legal requirement for claiming fair use of non-free content. I appreciate that if it is, then "we canot make an exception to identifying copyright holder because research is hard" (your edit summary) but there are some consequences, I think:

1. Almost none of WP's non-free images mention the copyright holder.
2. Many such images have attribution/sourcing that is limited to a URL to where the image was found.
3. Since, on the web, the source of an image (the web page) is very often not the original publisher of the image, and even the original publisher is not often the copyright holder, it seems likely that criterion 10a is not being met by nearly all non-free images on WP.
4. Some editors point out that the copyright holder can be assumed to be the author, or the publisher (e.g. the record label). I suspect both of these conflicting opinions are too simplistic. Therefore one cannot just guess who the copyright holder is.
5. I think (but not sure) that licensing info is not the same as copyright info. For example, the photo could be licensed from Corbis but the copyright lies with the photographer.
6. Unless the source of the image mentions who the copyright holder is, it would often require a professional search to find out.
7. If the copyright-holder aspect of 10a was enforced (and properly, not just taking someone's word (guess) for it), most non-free images on WP would be deleted.
8. There is tension at AfD where images are being criticised for failing the second-part of 10a, despite this being true for nearly all other non-free images. I know WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS but this is WP:ITISALLCRAP.

Would it be possible for you to comment on this matter. Any talk-page lurkers with legal knowledge on this matter are also welcome (those whose opinion is uninformed are not :-). Thanks very much. Colin° 12:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Identifying the copyright holder is really important! Ignoring all of the practical benefits of doing so for the moment, the author of any article containing the potentially infringing content should be very motivated to demonstrate that they were engaged in best practices, or, as we might put it, acting in good faith.

I think that you're overstating the difficulty here a little. Most of our non-free content is album/book/movie/video game covers. This stuff is just copyright the producer. It's really easy to identify. Maybe we'll get that wrong from time to time when there's an unusual arrangement we don't know about, but I wouldn't worry much about that. Stuff that's just listed with a link isn't properly sourced, so it has a problem beyond just identifying the copyright holder. Who's the author? Where did it come from? If it's just random stuff from some webpage, we should make a replacement ourselves. Stuff from image databases like Corbis is radioactive, and we shouldn't go anywhere near it, so it doesn't matter whether Corbis is the copyright holder. I'm inclined to think that stuff that a) is really hard to source, b) is really necessary for the encyclopedia project, c) fits our criteria for including non-free content (including cannot be replaced in any way) is going to be such a small category that we can take the time to do a search for it. Jkelly (talk) 20:25, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. There's a proposal over at Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content you might like to comment on. I have a book which credits the cover design to one person and the cover photo to Corbis but doesn't say the copyright belongs to the designer (it might not, I gather, if their work isn't sufficiently original). Could we use such a book cover on WP even though the only copyright on the book cover might be the Corbis photo, which you say are radioactive. Most of the books I've looked at don't claim copyright for the publisher but for photographer/agency licensing the photos used or occasionally the artist. This makes me think the default "copyright belongs to the publisher" is wrong too often.Colin° 21:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

New image project

Hi. This little form letter is just a courtesy notice to let you know that a proposal to merge the projects Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Free images, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Fair use, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Moving free images to Wikimedia Commons and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Illustration into the newly formed Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Images and Media has met with general support at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Files. Since you're on the rosters of membership in at least one of those projects, I thought you might be interested. Conversation about redirecting those projects is located here. Please participate in that discussion if you have any interest, and if you still have interest in achieving the goals of the original project, we'd love to have you join in. If you aren't interested in either the conversation or the project, please pardon the interruption. :) Thanks. Moonriddengirl 13:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Frank McCourt

Hey there - are you aware of Frank McCourt's illness? -->David Shankbone 17:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Canada at FAR

User:Oei888 has nominated Canada for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:18, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Featured Articles review

I have nominated The Protocols of the Elders of Zion for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. I'm notifying you since I see you initiated the peer review ages ago. -Verdatum (talk) 04:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)