User talk:Collieman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 21:48, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Re: Yellow Train

We all have a lot to learn about Wikipedia (even Jimbo Wales I guess) because Wikipedia is always changing.

You could learn all there is to know by reading the rules, how to's, help files, etc, but I found the best way is to look at a few pages and if you see something, just click the edit link and see how it's done. If you still don't know, just do the best you can, somebody will be along in 5 minutes or so to do their best, and so it goes.

Take a look at some of the featured articles which represent the "best of Wikipedia" - this is what we are all aiming for.

-=# Amos E Wolfe talk #=- 23:20, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lac de Cavayere

Hi there, thanks for your post. No, I don't have any connection to Carcasonne I'm afraid so I hope my amends didn't change the sense of any of the article. I just felt it needed a bit of a wikify, took out some text that veered towards advertising and hopefully just made it more encyclopaedic. Hope that's all right, welcome to Wikipedia! Peeper 10:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Removing external links

Hi Collieman - I'm not sure which (single) edit you're referring to? Whatever, the reasons for removing the multiple links are clear - links to photo sites are not particularly helpful to an article, no matter how lovely the photos. It was also clear that the photos were for sale, with no mention on the site that they are not for profit, and a lot of the links added were pretty tenuous to their subject. As I noted in the reply to the anonymous user (see that talk page), link spam is not just commercial links, but also links used to up a search engine rating or that repeated linking that simply doesn't add value to the articles. Repeated, multiple copies of a link are not particularly helpful for every article that may be in some way related to a site - one link is usually enough in the most appropriate article (if there is one). Having followed the links in question, they were undoubtedly link spam to my mind. Sorry if you felt I was slighting your photos - I'm not - but are links to them really helping the article, simply boosting your ego (or wallet), or just tenuous clutter? I took the latter view. Stephenb (Talk) 17:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] wikilinking

You asked about wikilinking with respect to Acoustic cleaners. I'll need to re-read the article before commenting on it in particularly. Wikilinking is easy. We've got 995,460 articles (as of a couple seconds ago when I checked the main page), so most things you'd link to have an article. Go through and put square brackets around terms that look like they'd help people understand them better, then hit preview and see which are in red. Sometimes you'll have to work out where the article for a red link is stored ( and then you use the notation [[articlename|word]]). Remember, most articles exist, you jut have to figure out the article name. Some of the links will point to disambiguation pages; if it looks like a link might be a disambig page then click on the link in preview, trace it to the correct address, back up and be specific.

Does that help? Is it clear? RJFJR 14:30, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Collieman - just to note that Wikilinking doesn't mean adding a link to your article to every other article you can think of that's even marginally related. It also doesn't mean attempting to funnel readers toward a commercial external link - Wikipedia is not a portal page. Links have to be pretty relevant in each article and preferably follow a logical flow - the reader wants to know more about X, which naturally presents them with links about Y, which leads them onto Z. Also, some articles will link to high-level general concepts, while others will lead to more specific examples and implementations. Read around and you'll probably get a better feel for the way hyperlinking works with an encyclopedic style of writing.

All this to say that I've completed the cleanup of your insertion of acoustic cleaning links (many with associated external links to a commercial purveyor of same). Note that most of those links had been removed by other editors working with the specific pages in question - I chose to follow your trail of breadcrumbs instead. This was link spamming, and unfortunately not a useful addition to most (or all) of the articles where you'd added the link.

I've left the link in silo cleaning and with some misgivings left the one in silo, but you'll need to go back and edit even those additions to describe both pros and cons of the process you're linking to. What's there now is basically an ad, and is unlikely to survive future attention by NPOV-minded editors. It's always better to write things as neutrally and relevantly as possible the first time than it is to depend on other people cleaning them up for you. Have fun, and welcome to Wikipedia. - toh 20:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Acoustic cleaning wikify

Hi Collieman. I removed the wikify tag because I think it is only useful for articles that require a lot of it. I regularly clean up articles from the WP:WIKIFY list, and the list currently contains a few thousand pages. Not very encouraging... So when I see an article that looks ok, that has sections, links, categories, stub tags if needed,... I just take out the wfy tag. Check out the list and you will find articles that *really* need wikifying. Keep up the good work! Piet 22:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Acoustic cleaning

You asked for an opionion on how the Acoustic cleaning article looked. Actually, it looks pretty good to me. The major specific thing I found was the use of the term bridging. It isn't explicitly explained what this is though I think I know. There is a link to bridging but this is a disambiguation page that doesn't really explain it.

While I could follow the article with a little effort I suspect there are other cases where technical terms are being used that general readers might have trouble interpreting. A clearer description of bridging and a check for any other words that need clarifying seems in order. RJFJR 17:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:Cavayere2.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Cavayere2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam (T/C) 14:02, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Just place a tag like {{GFDL-self}}, if you can. Thank you --12:14, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Acoustic cleaning image

Hi, then please update the image description page for those images so they make it clear that all rights have in fact been released for those images, and that we have not simply been given permission to use them in that one article, then restore the no rights reserved template. Is is preferable that you also forward a copy of the permission to "permissions at wikimedia dot org" as described at Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission. Thanks. --Sherool (talk) 12:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, does this apply to Image:Acoustic cleaner 2.jpg too? I notice you only updated the Image:Acoustic cleaners.jpg image. Oh and don't subst: the license templates, the template doesn't work properly if you do (the image is put in the "license templates" category instead of the image template due to the way it's set up). --Sherool (talk) 22:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] grfty

grfty means what please? Kittybrewster 17:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:V-cemetery.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:V-cemetery.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified 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 media 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images 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. Stifle (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:V-cemetery-2.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:V-cemetery-2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified 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 media 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images 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. Stifle (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree images

Additionally, the above images have been listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because there is some doubt that the images are indeed {{NoRightsReserved}}. Stifle (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:V-cemetery-2.jpg

Hi, i have reloaded the 2 images and tried to make clear that they are photos i took and that they are free to use on wiki. The route is the same i have used many times and hope this is ok now Collieman 12:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you. Just make sure all images you upload are tagged. Stifle (talk) 16:20, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image:Acoustic cleaner 2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Acoustic cleaner 2.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. 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}}
  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 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. --– Quadell (talk) (random) 19:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image problems

You've uploaded at least three images with false license claims, as far as I can tell. These are:

  1. 18:07, 5 November 2006 Collieman (Talk | contribs | block) uploaded "Image:Usbmissiles.jpg" (own photograph)
  2. 18:02, 5 November 2006 Collieman (Talk | contribs | block) uploaded "Image:USBshredder.jpg" (Personal photograph.)
  3. 19:12, 25 May 2006 Collieman (Talk | contribs | block) uploaded "Image:Knickerbockerglory.jpg" (Knickerbocker Glory , created and photographed by Stephen Caudel,http://www.ice-cream-recipes.com, and released by him under a creative commons attribution licence.)

The first two were found on other websites, as professional product photos, and the third, while you provided a link to the source, the provided source lacked any verficiation of the license, and instead claimed all rights reserved. Don't do this anymore. If you get specific permission from a copyright holder to release their image under a free license, ask them to add the license information to the website where the image came from. If they won't do that, tell them to email permissions@wikimedia.org, including the URL of the original image, and a specific, clear statement of the free license they are putting it under, and a volunteer from that address will get things straighted out. Otherwise, we have to assume, as in these cases, that there is no license. If you upload further falsely licensed material, you will very likely be permanently blocked from editing on Wikipedia. Be aware. JesseW, the juggling janitor 21:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/l/User_talk%7ECollieman_c1bd.html"