User talk:Tedzsee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Article Hugues Panassié

Hi! I translated your article about Hughes Pannassié in the french wiki. You wrote (from the book from Mezz Mezzrow):

"[The Nazi censor] was shown a record labeled La Tristesse de St. Louis, and Hugues explained helpfully that it was a sad song written about poor Louie the Fourteenth, lousy with that old French tradition. What the Kultur-hound didn't know was that underneath the phony label was a genuine Victor one, giving Louis Armstrong as the recording artist and stating the real name of the number -- St. Louis Blues."

St. Louis was Louis the nineth (and not Louis the Fourteenth). The mistake is from you or from Mezz Mezzrow? Serged

• Responded To---Tedzsee 21:57, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] On webcomic notability

I think my comments may have been misleading on the AFD. What I meant to say, was that I wouldn't delete a comic based purely on Alexa, with a rank like yours. There are other factors as well, Google search will generally bring up something interesting for notable comics, and a look into the forums also helps. I would not have deleted your comic based on Alexa, but I probably would have nominated it for other reasons.

The problem is that if I gave out the alexa web rank on the afd nomination, some extreme webcomic inclusionists would probably claim it almost meets the Alexa criteria, so it's an instant keep. We have had some users just voting "keep - meets proposal B", the most ridiculous reason ever. Have you seen proposal B on WP:COMIC, it just states that if a webcomic has existed for x amount of time, it's an instant keep. That's a total farce. - Hahnchen 13:55, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Hahnchen, Alexa ranks are meaningless. You should stop using them entirely. Factitious 02:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Oops

Sorry for that revert. My mistake. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:23, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] SW holiday special

Thanks for editing the article. I typed that summary quite fast when I did it, and really got tired of going through the movie trying to cover everything! The Wookieepedian 00:57, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Comment

User:Snowspinner has opened up a request for comment page about my contributions and behaviour. Being that I deleted the article about your comic, and deleted an article that you yourself wrote on Built for Comfort, I'm sure that you could provide some decent balanced commentary on the situation. Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Hahnchen - Hahnchen 17:05, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal and RfC

Hi Tedzee,

I looked at your comment on my proposal, and moved it to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Webcomics/Notability_and_inclusion_guidelines, at the bottom, to keep the discussion centralized.

Incidentally, I saw your comments on Hahnchen's RfC. I thought some of them were beyond the scope of the RfC, and I created the talk page there to say so.

Hopefully we'll get some good guidelines out soon, and this divisivness will die down. People are taking all of this very personally, which is understandable in many cases and definitely to be avoided. -- SCZenz 01:09, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Souring of debate on comic guidelines

I thought a day or two ago we were going to get some kind of consensus, but things seem to have gone very sour today, especially in Wikipedia_talk:Websites#Conflicts_of_interest. Since you generally disagree with me, but seem to be interested in gaining some kind of consensus, can you take a look at it? I've been trying very hard to compromise, and I fear I may have taken too hard a line, but I don't think the issue is invalid, and snowspinner hasn't responded to it in a very constructive way. But maybe I'm out of line, which is why I'm asking your opinion. Can you let me know what do you think? -- SCZenz 07:01, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ideas for WP:COMIC

Hi Tedzsee,

A couple of ideas for WP:COMIC I wanted to run by you. First, I think moving to WP:WEB was an error; it seemed to make sense if there were two discussions, but WP:WEB is abandoned otherwise. I therefore suggest we move all our discussion/ideas back to WP:COMIC, and leave a note behind on the WP:WEB proposal page that says:

Webcomics, as works of art using the medium of the internet, have different standards than for other websites. Please see WP:COMIC.

That will address the concern that the other proposal might pass at some point and we'd have conflicting guidelines. I'd keep an eye on the WP:WEB proposal to make sure nobody removed that line, especially if we got WP:COMIC passed.

My second idea is just wondering your opinion on whether we should have an extra catch-all criterion. If we did, I'd want it to specifically note that whatever assertion there is must be verifiable, and that personal opinions on the artistic merit of the comic are not appropriate for the AfD page per WP:NOR. (We'd word that to be clear that we were not excluding personal opinions of experts on other webpages, of course.) Then again, I think both the extra catch-all business, and the two things I just noted, are already clear per the preamble and existing policy, so I could go either way on whether to add the extra criterion. What do you think? -- SCZenz 02:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't know what Snowspinner's issue is exactly what the 7th guideline as you wrote it, but I think we're in complete agreement that speculating on that won't get anyone anywhere. Do you have any opinion on an 8th "catch-all" guideline as I mentioned above? (Forgive me if you already commented somewhere and I missed it.) -- SCZenz 07:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:COMMISSIONED.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:COMMISSIONED.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 on Wikipedia 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. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. --OrphanBot 08:14, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:8ELEVEN-change.jpg listed for deletion

— J3ff 22:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:Boasas.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Boasas.gif. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image 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 image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, 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 want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 06:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Chante.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Chante.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 02:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)