User talk:KFP
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to my talk page! Please post new messages at the bottom of this page and please use headlines when starting new talk topics. I will usually reply on this page. Thank you.
Archives |
---|
Contents |
[edit] updated population
Please present some kind of source for the updated population of Helsinki that you claim.
As Most sources i can google up says balues in the 970 - 980 thousand region and as helsnki's population movement is not at a big growth i am a bit sceptical about the figure.
A few months back there was someone who tried to frantically over and over up the numbers of inhabitants in the cities of Finland on wikipedia, so a source would be great to have.
Gillis 13:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, I just decided to check the claim of 975,000 and added the population of Helsinki to those of Espoo, Vantaa and Kauniainen (I retrieved population stats from the cities' official websites at [1], [2], [3] and [4]). The sum was 986,531. I meant to present the sources but forgot... --KFP 08:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Digital Scientific Echosounder
Hi, Guess I am still feeling my way around Wiki. Did you have some suggestions for editing this article? Thanks, Bmcclure
- Ok, I have now made some edits that hopefully improve the article (see diff). --KFP 10:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Featured picture promotion
|
Thanks for the great nom! howcheng {chat} 06:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Prokudin-Gorskii-19.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on November 16, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations!
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for moving my picture from Greater Helsinki to Wikipedia:Damn it, Jim, I'm a Bad Joke, not Other Deleted Nonsense. The picture really is from the municipality border, although I admit it isn't apparent from the picture. JIP | Talk 07:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] King's Quest games
You're right, the games are not in the public domain. The fan remakes caused a lot of legal troubles, although they eventually came to an agreement with Vivendi. Kat, Queen of Typos 02:41, 12 October 2006 (UTC) (owner of sierraplanet.com)
[edit] Thank you very much
For catching my silly, should-have-been prevented messup with that ant page. Should have gotten more sleep or something last night, I guess. Again, thanks! Edward Wakelin 00:18, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jethro Tull
Oh, sorry, I had completely forgotten about the page history... There is some way of adjusting that mess, isn't there? I did it a bit in a hurry, that should teach me a lesson! Thanks for pointing that out. Ciacchi 16:08, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Congrats!
By the way, I just got your note. Thanks for promoting the image! NauticaShades 13:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Venera 14
Even if the copyright owner granted permission for it to be used exclusively on wikipedia on actual wikipedia discussion pages? Doesn't that cut the muster, I mean its not copyvio. A mcmurray 01:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia permits fair use images in articles but featured picture candidates must be in the public domain or have a free license. --KFP (talk | contribs) 02:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- That's pretty ridiculous. The copyright owner gave permission to use it on wikipedia, just because everyone can't have it shouldn't exclude it. I am really beginning to not like Wikipedia at all. A mcmurray 02:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, as Wikipedia is a free content project, we cannot accept images, text or other media that is licensed as "Wikipedia-only" (because such content is not free). --KFP (talk | contribs) 02:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I removed the nomination (though I don't believe the reasoning you provided is true--and this isn't a personal reflection upon you) because the photo is copyrighted and its copyright owner as well as myself don't really believe that Wikipedia should be able to demand that it be released under free license. Thanks for your input and such.A mcmurray 18:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- I understand that it may seem unreasonable that Wikipedia requires that images must have a license that allows creation of derivative work, commercial use and reuse by third parties. However, licenses that restrict such usage are incompatible with Wikipedia's copyright policy. --KFP (talk | contribs) 11:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- That's fine. Can't fight the power, at least in this case, I'll just find another image to nominate, btw are Wikimedia Commons images eligible, I suppose they must appear in a Wikipedia article huh? A mcmurray 18:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, all commons images should either be in the public domain or have a sufficiently free license (for example the GNU Free Documentation License or Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike license). A good help page for evaluating potential featured picture candidates is at WP:WIAFP. --KFP (talk | contribs) 21:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Congrats
|
[edit] db-commons
Aha, I'm with you now, KFP - sorry about that! I tend to immediately not delete commons images if people haven't updated the incoming links. I will have to check the tag more thoroughly. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Proto::type 15:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RfA thanks
Thank you for voting in my RfA, I passed. I appreciate your input. Please keep an eye on me(if you want) to see if a screw up. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)