User talk:Ganfon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Pyhon$.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pyhon$.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 07:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Flyingcircus 2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Flyingcircus 2.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey 19:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] JFK Assassination

Hey, how are doing? I'm not attempting to censor you, or start an edit war, I'm just giving you a heads up. The Discovery Channel and History Channel are subdivisions of NBC and ABC respectively, and often air newsreports from the parent stations news division. Therefore I suggest that you double check that the investigations you are referring to were in fact done by NBC or ABC, and cite it to them. Also, the History Channel will often air programs like "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" but the program is not a History Channel investigation. It was done by some third party not related to ABC. If you aren't more specific about who is doing the investigations, you risk getting your entries deleted.

Ramsquire 21:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The reason the book description should not go into that section is that because a book cannot recreate events visually like the other things in that section. That section was set up to list video of the assassination and others who have recreated video of the assassination. I do believe that the book does belong in the article in some fashion, but not there. I'm thinking of adding a book section to the article (since there is one for Film portrayals). That information would go nicely there.

Ramsquire 22:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright problems with Image:Flyingcircus 2.jpg

feydey 22:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

What do You mean with: ...because I feel, being it a promo shot, no rights are be reserved, as gernerally [sic] the case with promo shots? Could You also forward that response from BBC to me. Thanks feydey 23:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The promophoto license states: This tag should only be used for images of a person, product, or event that is known to have come from a press kit or similar source, for the purpose of reuse by the media. You got a general reply that only says about this photo: The image you requested: "Flyingcircus 2.jpg", is one of our 'free downloads' and is being made available to you for your use, just free downloads, no info on reuse - also the source page has no indication that this is a promotional photo for media use. Also currently the Monty Python article contains numerous fair use photos of them, and remember that Wikipedia tries to keep the amount of fair use images per article low, see Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy #8. Best, feydey 00:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

Hi Ganfon, I see you have nominated yourself as admin. Unfortunately I believe you have little or no chance of this succeeding at the moment. Most editors who give an opinion are looking for at least 2500 edits spread over several months. In addition, you haven't completed the RfA itself: you are missing the nominating statement, you haven't answered the standard questions and you haven't accepted the RfA yet. You might want to consider withdrawing for now to avoid a lot of negative feedback. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia and I hope you will come back to the RfA proces later. Best, Gwernol 01:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User contributions

Hi Ganfon. You can see any user's list of contributions. Go to the user page, then look at the navigation boxes on the left of the screen below the Wikipedia logo. Just below the search box you'll see a bulleted list of links. About half way down those is "User contributions". This lists all the edits the user has made (except those made to subsequently deleted pages). You can look through that list to see what edits they have made.

If you want to get a count of simply the number of edits made, you can look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_edit_counters which has links to a number of tools you can use. Some of these are not currently working, and many of them are complex to install and/or use, but they're at least available. I hope this answers your question. Best, Gwernol 21:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] your edits to AFD: GTA Storylines

This message is in regards to your edits to the Article for Deletion: GTA Storylines. In your comments, you said:

There is no discussion here, it will be KEPT, if deleted...look for it again in minutes, because there is absolutly no case for deletion.-Ganfon

I would highly advise you to remove your comments, especially in regards to your failed request for administratorship. Threatening to recreated a validly deleted article through the deletion processes is vandalism, or rather, actually going through with it is. Threatening is just bad-form and uncivil. Remember you do not own the deletion debate, It is a discussion for deletion, everyone gets a fair voice. Please review WP:OWN. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 04:52, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:WP:AIV

I appreciate your efforts, but next time you report a vandal to WP:AIV, do it according to the format posted on the page. Also, don't abbreviate. I was lucky to be able to find out from your userpage that MTPA was probably Manheim Township Performing Arts. If people didn't follow the proper format for reporting vandals, it would make the task much harder. Thanks. --Nishkid64 01:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: What Happened?

I deleted your AfD entry because it was not a nominatoin for an article to be deleted. (Please don't use it to make a point). As for the AfD notice, I removed it when I deleted that page, but an anon added it back, of which I've reverted again. --WinHunter ^(talk) 02:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka

Thank you very much for your strong support in my RfA. Unfortunately consensus was not reached, and the nomination was not successful. However, I do appreciate your comments, and found them encouraging. Please rest assured that I am still in support of the Wikipedia project, and will continue to contribute without interruption. Thanks again! --Elonka 18:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Danke.

Never gotten a barnstar before. HalfShadow 01:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image violation

Your addition of a copyrighted image (and one missing license and rationale) to the article on Elizabeth Mitchell is in violation of WP:FUC and has been reverted. --Yamla 04:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Lost Podcast with Jay and Jack

I just deleted this article as a failure of WP:CSD A7...an article which does not assert the notability or importance of the subject. The associated photo was deleted as an orphaned fair use image. If you would like to dispute my decision, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Thanks, Alphachimp 17:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lost Podcast with Jay and Jack Alphachimp 18:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Club International

I am the originator of the AfD for this article and would like to withdraw my nomination in favor of the {{notability}} tag I have placed on the article and the information I have provided on its Talk page.

If you agree with the withdrawal of the nomination (I realize you might not), could you please strike through your recommendation on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Club International page and note your agreement with the alternative?

Thanks.—Nicer1 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Off Topic with Matt and Dave

A tag has been placed on Off Topic with Matt and Dave, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain web site, blog, forum, or other community of web users that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:Off Topic with Matt and Dave. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Calton | Talk 02:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Off Topic is a podcast i mentioned their MySpace as a website in the userbox, and that can be changed to the Gcast site, but they are not soley a blog,

Poscasts are covered under {{db-web}} as "web content".

I insistantly request you reverse this immediatley.

Nope. --Calton | Talk 02:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Further reading

I have highlighted the appropriate portions of the notice above for your convenience. Note the use of the adjectives. Also, read this and this. --Calton | Talk 04:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:JMoore.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JMoore.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 17:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:JMoore.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:JMoore.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 17:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:JMoore.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JMoore.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 17:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please stop

Please stop uploading images unless you are able to provide all necessary information, and until you have gone back and added this to all the images you have already uploaded. All copyrighted images need their source (including copyright holder), an accurate license, and a detailed hand-written fair-use rationale. Additionally, images must be used according to their license (for example, a tv screenshot may only be used to illustrate and provide critical commentary on the t.v. show). Finally, see WP:FUC. A fair-use image may not be used to illustrate a living person. Your violations of Wikipedia image copyright and fair-use policies cannot be tolerated as they are putting the Wikipedia directly at risk for copyright-infringement lawsuits. Thanks. --Yamla 17:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You said: "Yes, I did forget a source for JMoore.jpg. But, you do not need to treat me like a fool by placing three seperate comments on my talk page, that all basically say the same thing: I screwed up. I especially do not appreciate the last message, that took the tone of a warning message like I had kept uploading images without sources. True, i have uploaded many images to wikipedia...but all of the other ones have sources. Yes, I will go back and check...but i'm 99% sure that this was a one time screw up. Thinking back, I did this once before..about a year ago uploading my very first image. I'm sorry, I dont mean to be rude...but your excessive comments are insulting and unnecessary."

Every fair-use image I checked was missing the mandatory detailed fair-use rationale required by the license. For example, Image:Ed4Ep17.jpg and Image:Ed4Ep2.jpg (neither of which have an accurate source, either). --Yamla 18:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page, and for increasing the count on my "badge of honour". --stephenw32768^<talk> 00:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

MOTHERFUCKER, DONT BE CHANGING THE FUCKING GTA TIMELINE!