User talk:Hardouin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Archive


Contents


[edit] Saints Wikiproject

I noted that you have been contributing to articles about saints. I invite you to join the WikiProject Saints. You can sign up on the page and add the following userbox to your user page.

This user is a member of the Saints WikiProject.


Thanks! --evrik 16:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving?

Ever thought about archiving your talk page? --Fang Aili talk 15:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. Hardouin 10:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:LRlogo1.gif.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:LRlogo1.gif.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

How's it going, Hardouin? --Fang Aili talk 16:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I see my hello came at a contentious time. Well, I just wanted to send a pleasant vibe your way. Cheers. --Fang Aili talk 16:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I haven't forgotten you, don't worry. Also, don't worry about ThePromenader. Situation under control, so far. I was going to leave a message on that talk page you mentioned, but I was so busy lately, plus I started an article which turned out to be much longer and much more demanding than what I had anticipated. But I think the result looks good. I FINALLY put something on my user page. You like it? It sums up the spirit of editing on Wikipedia really. Anyway, I need to find the right words to leave a message on that talk page. One question I have for you: how is the female partner referred to in the English speaking press? Is she called "the lady"? or is she called "the woman"? I don't think I have ever watched a skating event in the US or in England, so I'm not sure. For example, would they say: "they looked set to win the gold medal, but the woman tripped in the last seconds"? or would they say: "they looked set to win the gold medal, but the lady tripped in the last seconds"? Hardouin 16:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
She'd be referred to as a female ice skater or by her a name. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 17:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Heh, well feel free to chime in here. --Fang Aili talk 17:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
From googling and my own experience watching figure skating on tv, I can say that "women" is much more commonly used. The ISU's own competition coverage often uses "women" rather than "ladies". Dr.frog's main point of contention is that only "ladies" is used in ISU rulebooks, however nowhere does it say that you can't use "women", and since its own website uses "women", I do not see how this whole thing really matters. The word "ladies" is just a hold-over from the turn of the 20th century. --Fang Aili talk 17:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Women is used for the name of the sport women's ice/figure skating, female for an individual. To describe a group of skaters, female ice skaters will generally be used. See Google Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 17:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
No offense, but I don't think you know what's being discussed here. There are many arguments to be considered, and they don't all involve google. This was a discussion between Hardouin and myself. If you really wish to express an opinion about this please do so at the link I provided above, and please read the discussion at Talk:Pair skating as well. --Fang Aili talk 17:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid my Chinese is got great; I understood maybe half the characters, but I think I got the jist of it. :)

One of the biggest arguments against the exclusive use of "ladies" is, in my mind, the existence of several agreements to use "women". (See the first decision, the second debate (note the table in that section), and the archived original debate.)

Re: your request for links:

Cheers, Fang Aili talk 18:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

To be clear, I have no objection to the event being called "Ladies'", because that is its official name. I just don't want to have to call a women or girl a "lady" whenever I'm writing about them. Le sigh. Thank you for looking into this. What I eventually would like to do is improve pair skating to a good- or FA-level status, and thereby attract more attention from other editors. Then I doubt not that the issue will be raised again. --Fang Aili talk 18:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that's exactly what I was going to propose: using "lady" for the official name of events, but using "woman" whenever talking about the female partner inside the articles. I feel too drained to write anything tonight. Will try tomorrow. Hardouin 18:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good. Thanks muchly and pleasant dreams. --Fang Aili talk 18:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tallest structures - "Paris area"

A few of us have managed to come into agreement over an "in the Paris area" title - as a former participant in the discussion, your views and vote on the matter would much be welcome at Talk:List of tallest buildings and structures in Paris. Thank you. THEPROMENADER 17:40, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:SpeInf.png

Thanks for uploading Image:SpeInf.png. 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:

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. 00:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TfD of France infobox

Hey Hardouin, The France infobox is up again for TfD. I don't know if you knew that but I know (from past interactions) that you are one of the main editors of the France article and its infobox. While I favor one standard infobox, I remembered that the France infobox had some unique qualities to it. It seems like the standard infobox has been updated to accommodate these qualities, but I am not sure if that meets your requirements. In any case, I voted to delete (but cautiously). Which is why I am sending you this message so you have a say. Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 September 6. Qu'en pensez-vous? MJCdetroit 02:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I have tried to update the standard infobox to allow for the French infobox uniqueness. Hope I have settled the points raised. --Bob 00:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moving Standard Mandarin

I've started a thread to try to build proper consensus about whether to move Standard Mandarin to a more intuitive and perhaps neutral title or not. I've left this message at your talkpage because you've participated in previous discussions about a possible title change. Please feel free to contribute with your thoughts and arguments at Talk:Standard Mandarin#The move.

Peter Isotalo 12:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:StMaur.png

Thanks for uploading Image:StMaur.png. 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:

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. 19:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:RAlogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:RAlogo.gif. 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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 12:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Etymology of Myanmar

Hello, I noticed you removed the "wrong etymology" (see [1]) the Myanmar article. As a native Burmese speaker, I know that "myan" means "swift" or "fast", and "ma" means "sturdy" or "strong". But I may be incorrect (in that specific usage), so can you verify that the etymology is unclear with a citation? Thanks. Also, I reverted your addition of "Rakhine" to the Explanation of the names of Burma/Myanmar article because "Rakhine" does rhyme with "alpine" in standard Burmese, and the initial "r" was added to note that the Arakanese dialect pronounces it with a "r". The commission used romanisations that were already prevalent during the colonial period. The British attempted to anglicise words like "waing" (meaning "round") to "wine", and these spellings remain common today. --Hintha 21:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:AUflag.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:AUflag.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation

Quelle rigolade...merci de m'avoir prevenu :) --Stevage 20:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your latest revert spree

Hi. You've just added another page to your RfA case. Reverting a) against consensus b) for invented reasons is unprecedented. You have no leg to stand on, so please stop. Thanks. THEPROMENADER 11:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

There is mediation going on at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-09-10 List of Tallest buildings and structures in Paris. You and User:Grcampbell are bypassing the mediation by editing the very language that is being discussed on the mediation page. It's as simple as that. I'm quite sure that at some point some admins will intervene. Hardouin 11:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
You know full well that you cannot ever hope to tie the two together, and your trying to do so is just a desperate attempt to buy time. I could only welcome admin intervention, which explains my added complaint on the admin bulletin board. THEPROMENADER 11:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paris disputes...

Although I agree that making those changes while the underlying issue was being discussed in mediateion could violate WP:POINT. However, I am glad to see that a compromise is developing that clearly identifies that it is part of "greater paris" but not in paris "proper." Though I wish the citizens of the appropriate sections of the Île-de-France would just establish a Regional Municipality and put us all out of our misery.

I know this is very frustrating - especially when it is about articles you care about and have made substantial contributions to; however, I would suggest you leave them alone for a month or so - if only for your own health - and trust in time and the community concept to get it right Sorry I couldn't respond right away last week. --Trödel 23:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately both seem to be insutling each other. If they want to make it more difficult for the average English speaker to understand Paris - I guess that's how it'll be, and some of the audience will just find a better resource. --Trödel 15:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mail

Désolé Hardouin, j'avais cru que ma tentative pour t'envoyer un mail avait échoué. Je viens de te répondre. Metropolitan 10:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Localization maps in the Paris region

Paris and inner ring departments.
Paris and inner ring departments.

Hello, Hardouin. During last week end, I've spent a lot of time to create maps of localization of Paris suburbs. I thought it could be a nice feature to add it in the municipality template for each commune involved. Probably the best would be to remove the image which illustrates sometimes those commune to put that map instead. I just wanted to know your opinion about this. On the left you can see a preview for Créteil.

The map represents waters, greeneries, communes and departments boundaries. It is an svg file, which means that it is easy to edit it. For now, I've only made Créteil, however, it's very easy to do the same for other municipalities as you just need to fill any commune layer with transparent red. As layers for each department also exist, I guess we could use it for their articles too. What do you think ? Metropolitan 19:13, 4 October 2003 (UTC).

Okay, as obviously you're not here I will make a test with municipalities of Val-de-Marne. Here's a first shot with Créteil. Metropolitan 23:05, 4 October 2003 (UTC).
After thinking about it again, we talk here about adding more than 120 maps. I'm not used to operations of such a scale and I would definitely like better to have your opinion about it before doing anything. Hope to see you later. Metropolitan 23:05, 4 October 2003 (UTC).


Ok Hardouin, je viens de lire ta réponse. J'avoue que je m'attendais à quelque chose de plus chaleureux, mais bon. Si j'ai fais apparaître les zones boisées, c'était surtout pour mettre en évidence les zones urbanisées. Je ne trouve pas ça si idiot que ça. Au moins, ça permet de réaliser que la plupart des excroissances de Paris intramuros sont dues à l'intégration de zones vertes. En ce qui concerne l'idée d'aller au-delà des départements de petite couronne, j'y avais pensé, mais cela m'amenait à des difficultés techniques puisque l'on rentre dans un espace où l'urbanisation est moins homogène.

Par ailleurs, la petite couronne, c'est déjà pas si mal. Ca fait plus de 120 plans et c'est du boulot à uploader. De toute manière, il est écrit que la carte représente "Paris and inner ring departments", en ce sens, on s'imagine bien qu'il y a quelque chose au-delà sans quoi on ne préciserait pas "inner".

Cette carte m'a demandé pas mal d'heures de travail, j'aurai espéré plus de considérations, mais je respecte aussi ton point de vue. Les cercles n'apparaissent que pour les communes inférieures à 3 km². Je pensais que ça améliorait leur visibilité. Enfin, je ne me fais pas trop de souci par rapport à ceux qui voudraient les remplacer par des cartes de départements. Les cartes que j'utilise situent bien mieux les communes en question que de simples cartes départementales. En ce sens, les remplacer représenterait nécessairement une baisse de qualité. Je vais néanmoins étudier la question en ce qui concerne l'idée de nommer la ville de Paris. Bon bref, tu me fais quand même douter sur ces cartes. je vais sans doute chercher à connaître aussi l'avis d'autres wikipediens avant d'uploader le reste. Metropolitan 22:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC).

Je vois que tu as ajouté la carte aux communes de Seine-Saint-Denis a- sans tenir compte d'aucunes des remarques que j'avais faites, et b- sans même attendre que des gens répondent à ton message dans le template French commune. Pourquoi donc avoir contacté d'autres personnes si de toutes façons tu ne veux en faire qu'à ta tête? Je comprends pas la cohérence de ta démarche. Je répète une fois de plus que les infoboxes de Argenteuil, Sarcelles, Saint-Gratien, Massy, Vélizy-Villacoublay, Grigny, et près de 150 autres communes de banlieue dont j'ai créé les infoboxes, ne peuvent pour l'instant pas profitter de cette carte puisqu'elle ne couvre que la petite couronne, alors qu'il n'est pas si compliqué que ça de faire une carte couvrant toutes les communes jusqu'à la Francilienne. Donne-moi ton document source et je ferai cette carte moi-même si c'est le travail qui te rebutte. Hardouin 15:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Hardouin, les cartes précisent dans chaque cas qu'il s'agit de "Paris and inner ring départements", quiconque ne connaissant rien à l'agglomération parisienne en déduira tout de même qu'il existe un outer ring sans quoi la précision inner ring n'aurait aucun sens. Ces cartes de Paris et la petite couronne permettent déjà de traîter les deux tiers de la population de l'agglomération, c'est tout de même pas rien.
La raison pour laquelle ne figure pas sur ces cartes les communes de grandes couronnes sont très simples et je te les ai déjà expliqué. Mon document de travail ne dispose pas des délimitations du bâti, mais il dispose des délimations des zones vertes. En petite couronne, cela n'est pas un problème puisque l'agriculture représente moins de 1% de la surface. Néanmoins, ça n'est pas le cas en grande couronne où l'urbanisme est beaucoup moins homogène.
Si j'ai tant tenu que ça à maintenir les zones vertes sur la carte, c'est pour la simple raison qu'elles permettent de réaliser que les départements de la petite couronne sont totalement urbanisés, puisque ce qui y apparaît en orangé semble être logiquement le bâti. Alors certes, je te l'accorde, ça n'est pas ultimement précis puisque Dugny, Noiseau ou le Nord de Tremblay ne sont pas totalement urbanisés, mais bon, c'est déjà mieux que rien.
D'accord, OK, toute la banlieue ne figure pas sur ces cartes et elles ne permettent pas la localisation des communes de grande couronne, mais c'est quand même déjà pas mal, non ? Metropolitan 16:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC).
Petite précision, je vais maintenant m'occuper des communes des Hauts-de-Seine. Metropolitan 16:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC).
Hardouin, j'avoue avoir beaucoup de mal à te comprendre et je te trouve à la limite de la paranoia pour être parfaitement honnête. Non, tu as parfaitement tort lorsque tu dis que cette carte donne l'impression d'un éloignement. Au contraire, elle présente le tout comme un ensemble cohérent. Ajouter une échelle pour de telle carte de localisation n'est pas une obligation, ni les cartes de localisation de Bruxelles-Capitale, ni celles de Greater London ne disposent d'échelle. Et je ne vois pas ce que de telles échelles changeraient sincèrement. En ce qui concerne la finesse du découpage français, les choses sont comme elle sont et il faut faire avec. Par ailleurs, je ne pense sincèrement pas que le lecteur moyen s'imaginerait qu'il s'agisse nécessairement d'une région immense sous prétexte que beaucoup de municipalités y figureraient.
L'objectif de ces cartes est d'accroître la visibilité des banlieues parisiennes. Je ne trouve pas ça plus mal. D'ailleurs, j'ai aussi dans l'idée d'utiliser le même modèle pour les arrondissements parisiens. Je compte aussi l'utiliser pour localiser La Défense, et les bois de Boulogne et de Vincennes. Par ailleurs, ces modèles peuvent aussi illustrer d'autres cartes, comme celles de la densité de population ou de la densité d'emploi.
Si tu crains réellement que certaines banlieues apparaissent comme plus distantes qu'elles ne le sont réellement, tu devrais faire comme moi et rajouter des photos montrant à quoi elles ressemblent physiquement. A ce sujet, les peintures du XIXem siècle présentant les communes des Hauts-de-Seine comme des villages paisibles sont beaucoup plus dangereuses que ne le sont mes cartes de localisation, qui, je le répète, rapprochent ces banlieues de Paris bien plus qu'elles ne les en éloignent.Metropolitan 16:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC).
I did this one not so long ago. All the commune limits are there, and it's there for the taking. Cheers.
THEPROMENADER 18:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for this map ThePromenader, but once again this does not show what are the urbanized areas. By the way ThePromenader, you haven't told me what you thought about those locator maps for municipalities of inner ring départements.

Hardouin, to answer to your question:

  1. My source can't be found on the internet, and because of its size I cannot upload it (It's a big .gif file).
  2. I've explained exactly my point of view on each of your advices.

More importantly, I do have severe troubles to understand how you can see those locator maps as leading to a distanciation of Paris suburbs from the city proper.Metropolitan 18:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Evry Loc.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Evry Loc.PNG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:F_ww2_DeGaulle.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:F_ww2_DeGaulle.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dévots

Greetings Hardouin, I was just reading through your page Dévots and I'm having trouble understanding one sentence, which I noted on the talk page. I'm no expert on the subject, and possibly this is the cause of my confusion....but possibly you could take a look and see if a revision is needed? Cryptonymius 07:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gascony

Bonjour, je contribue sur la wiki fr, et je viens de voir qu'il y a sur la version anglaise une carte de la Gascogne que tu as téléchargée. Les limites de cette carte sont douteuses...en effet la Gascogne remonte jusqu'à la pointe du Médoc et englobe tout l'Ouest de la Gironde. Crois tu que tu puisses retoucher cette carte? Cordialement Matthieu 87.88.248.33 22:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok laisse tomber, j'ai corrigé! Larrousiney 21:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:La Défense.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:La Défense.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 its not being deleted. Thank you. —Nv8200p talk 13:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:FranceCities.png

Thanks for uploading Image:FranceCities.png. 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. -SCEhardT 03:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Seihamuni1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Seihamuni1.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. Oden 10:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bordeaux map.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bordeaux map.png, 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. — MECU≈talk 03:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bordeaux1 map.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bordeaux1 map.png, 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. — MECU≈talk 03:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bordeaux2 map.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bordeaux2 map.png, 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. — MECU≈talk 03:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bordeaux3 map.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bordeaux3 map.png, 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. — MECU≈talk 03:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Untagged image

An image you uploaded, Image:DaCo.gif, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 00:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:AUcoat.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:AUcoat.gif. 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:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:AlsLogo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:AlsLogo.png. 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:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:BNormandie.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:BNormandie.gif. 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 the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:10, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 02:10, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:F ww2 DeGaulle.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:F ww2 DeGaulle.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. |EPO| 12:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Philippe3-1.jpg

Hi,

I tagged this image for deletion, as it is not a phto of a 2D work of art - it's 3D.

kind regards,

213.84.115.169 10:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Philippe3-1.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Philippe3-1.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. BJBot 13:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:PA20.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:PA20.gif, 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. BigrTex 16:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:TourEDF.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TourEDF.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 12:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 12:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/a/r/User_talk%7EHardouin_2573.html"