User talk:DuranDuran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Myself as a albums wikiprojects

Hi,

For some reason i have been blocked from editing completely everything on wikipedia. I have been a member for over a year now and feel that it is very unfair that i am blocked. Is there any chance thet i can get unbloked? Thank you. DuranDuran 12:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• You haven't been blocked. When you are blocked, the only things you can edit are your talk page and your userpage. Since you posted here, on my talk page, you have not been blocked. I checked your block log as well at [1], and you've never been blocked. What problems in particular are you experiencing in editing? Also, you had two fair use tagged images on your userpage. I removed them as they are not allowed to exist on your userpage per Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9. --Durin 13:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not sure what the message on my talk page was about, but as Durin mentioned above, you have never been blocked. Nor have I ever interacted with you. Nor have I ever described any of your edits as "vandalism". I don't know why you posted on my talk page (the fact that you could post there showed you were not blocked). Sorry, Gwernol 14:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Lebo_mathosa.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Lebo_mathosa.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 13:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Why on earth are you going around posting blatant misinformation on all of the Duran Duran pages? The band has stated no such thing, regarding the use of Saxophone on the new album. Instead, they have merely acknowledged a fan's Ask Katy question by answering thus :

WE HAVE BEEN PONDERING THE SAME THING, NOT QUITE SURE YET, BUT IT DEFINITELY FEELS LIKE THE RIGHT TIME FOR THE RETURN OF THE SAXOPHONE, WE WILL KEEP YOU POSTED.

Certainly not a confirmation of the use of Andy Hamilton on several songs.

As for going from page to page, posting that the albums' working title is "The Music's Between Us". If you are going to post information of a dubious nature on several pages, you would be well advised to post the source of your addition. Adding falsehoods to the Wikipedia entries of your favourite band is only going to be damaging to them in he long run. And honestly, I hardly think the band are considering using the song lyrics from the first single off their last album as a title to their new album.

[edit] Night Runner

It's a clever cover but when a single's cover is not available, wikipedia has a gray cover to be the temporary cover until the actual single cover becomes available.you cant post your own version of single's covers, only the actual one. --Gregxscene 06:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I've told you once, i've told you twice.Your orange cover for the duran duran single isnt needed, just let the wikipedia gray cd be the default until the actual cover is released.you using that cover only confuses and provides no need. --Gregxscene

Well since you are so crazy about it i wont delete it no more, but understand that its isnt allowed or wikipedia wont have a gray cover.your orange doesnt make it any better.but ill leave it alone until someone else takes it off.

good luck --Gregxscene

You must have me confused with someone else, I never called you stupid, if you look at my messages above you dont see stupid anywhere so i dont know where you are getting this from.I said that I won't bother you no more about it since you are so crazy about it and I'll just wait for someone else to take it down like i did cause theres no use for it.This isnt a personalize web page where you cant spruce it up and make it look cool because its your favorite band, so although you enjoy your orange cover theres really no use for it. But since you refuse to keep it down and use wikipedia's default coming soon cover like all the other upcoming singles, i just decided to leave it alone.But I NEVER called you stupid.where you got that from, idk but you neeed to check the facts before you say i said something when i didnt.

--Gregxscene 19:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use images in discographies

Thank you for all your work on the Duran Duran discography and other articles. I would like to ask that you please do not add album or single covers to the singles chronology at the bottom of the infoboxes. It is, in fact, part of Wikipedia's fair use image policy that these copyrighted covers should not be used anywhere other than the article for that specific musical work: please see the WikiProject Music image guidelines. More generally, you can also look at the Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Fair use, where it explains that fair use can be claimed for "Cover art from various items, for identification and critical commentary (not for identification without critical commentary)."

Discographies and infoboxes do not count as an article or as critical commentary; I learned this myself when I constructed the first singles table for the Duran Duran discography page and was asked to remove the images. You have done beautiful work that would be a shame to dismantle, but the images are not truly necessary to provide information to the readers here -- if they are curious about the cover, they can click through to the article which displays the image in its proper context. Wikipedia constantly struggles to balance our need to use clear illustrations with the limits of copyright law and fair use for images.

I will be removing the discography images from the Duran Duran article (which is already both well-illustrated and overly long) in the next few days. If you have ideas on how to modify the Duran Duran discography so that it is still attractive but does not use fair use images, please go right ahead! Again, thank you for your work. — Catherine\^talk 14:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for being so understanding! As I said, I had the same urge you did to add the images to the discography, but I am glad that like me you understand the rationale for not doing so once it is explained to you. Thanks for accepting the advice so graciously! I hope we can continue to work together to make all the Duran Duran and related music articles better. — Catherine\^talk 17:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Adam ant 2006.jpg listed for deletion

[edit] re: Duran Duran Discography and "Gloss!"

Hi. I did not mean to undermine any hard work you did, but I simply wanted to bring the page to formatting guidelines carried over from WP:CHARTS (i.e. no "#" symbol, no boldfacing chart positions, which the D2 page didn't have anyway, etc). I understand that people want discography pages to look good, but the extra coloring, etc. makes it look too much like a fan page and is not encouraged (I've worked on and witnessed many articles get changed because of things like this, and those only had various shades of gray). As far as the data is concerned, I did not remove any of it except "U.S. Modern Rock" statistics. I don't know where most of that came from, since the Modern Rock Tracks chart did not exist before 1988. I have the reference materials to check those other charts, but at first glance they look to be correct. I was also going to mention all of the album images, but I see you've had a conversation about that already on your Talk Page. Just as an FYI - I do have several discography pages in my watchlist and I have noticed editors and bots going through them recently and removing images, so I suspect a lot more will also have this done, including Duran Duran. - eo 21:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

First, it is not an inconvenience. As far as working-or-rumored title Gloss!, I think it is fine to leave it as long as there is a note saying that the title is unconfirmed (which there is). I did notice, however, that the superscript ¹ after the title doesn't actually link to a reference so you may want to check that (I assume you're the one who placed it there). I would not change the name of the album's article yet until the title is confirmed. I see too that the images have been removed, which I suspected would happen. The page still looks good tho, I like the flags in the column headers. - eo 13:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Heya, DuranDuran, I removed the "Gloss" bits. I know the title "Gloss" is running rampant on the rumour mill, but I also know for a fact that it's a false rumour. I was there on the DuranDuran.com message boards when the fans created it as a joke, along with many other hypothetical titles. It got picked up as a "real" title by an Italian fan, who reported it straight to Italian fan groups, who started publishing it on their websites, which then started getting picked up by English websites and media. I seriously doubt it's going to end up being the real title (although you never know, with the group's twisted sense of humour). Best of luck to you! — Catherine\^talk 14:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:JJBK.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JJBK.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:BabyJane2007.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BabyJane2007.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} 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 the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShadowHalo 17:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright issue with Image:BabyJane2007.jpg

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Image:BabyJane2007.jpg, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e166/snlsnlsnl/back2basics.jpg. As a copyright violation, Image:BabyJane2007.jpg appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Image:BabyJane2007.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Image:BabyJane2007.jpg and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Image:BabyJane2007.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Image:BabyJane2007.jpg.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Spellcast 18:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:JimKerr050505.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JimKerr050505.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:08, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Untitled Human League album

Hi again, please do not recreate this article, as it was already deleted per the AfD process. Oakey has stated it is "a goal of the band to work on new material in 2007" but there has been no confirmation that a new album is in the works, near completion or on the release schedule of a record label. Without any type of source, it will be deleted again. - eo 16:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Concur! Please dont add speculation again. Further info Read Talk:The_Human_League

- Andi064 20:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Re: Your comment on my talk page - I applaud your motivation but I’m afraid that, speculation is simply against the rules of Wikipedia which is why your edit keeps getting reverted. But rest assured there are people here who know the band personally, and as soon as there is any confirmation of an album it will be added with an all important reference. Because the band deliberately don't have an official Website (Philip dislikes the internet!) it is important that the Wikipedia articles are factually correct as they are the sole source of information for the media other thant the 'semi official' fan run sites. Thank youAndi064 09:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Des+jeremy.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Des+jeremy.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)