User talk:Blathnaid/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Image rationale

Thanks for your efforts on adding the templates to all those images the spamming Betacommandbot has flagged. I no longer support images on Wikipedia and one of the reasons for this is the rationale information that I gave for the many book images I've uploaded over the years was perfectly acceptable 6 months ago but because it no longer looks "pretty" images are being flagged for deletion. Unless I am paid I'm not wasting my time reinventing the wheel. The reason I'm dropping you a line is you've intercepted a few delete templates relating to images from the "Saint" book series (Simon Templar). I, along with a member who quit the project a year ago because of the image policy, among other reasons, uploaded book images for all 50 of the Saint books. I've only received Beta's spam for about a half dozen of these so presumably the rest will follow. If you have the time to kill, please feel free to jump ahead and "fix" the image pages for the rest of the series. The list (with links) can be found either on the main Simon Templar page linked above, or on the template included with the various book articles, such as Enter the Saint. Similarly, I don't know if all 25 or so Matt Helm books have also been "fixed" yet. Have fun! Cheers. 23skidoo (talk) 02:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Can I second the thanks from 23skidoo, you have done sterling work on these and many other Fair Use Rationale issues. I have loads of sympathy with 23skidoo about the "spam" messages although I can see the ultimate value of the template, i.e. making monitoring and automatic management of the FURs easier. However this messaging of editors in volume just puts people off, our Saint and Matt Helm editor a case in point. Anyway enough tirade, thanks for your work. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

You asked to be alerted about any users who have been massively "spammed" by BcB. User talk:LuciferMorgan has nearly 80 of them... I daresay he'd appreciate some of the help you so kindly offered. --kingboyk (talk) 13:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC) (He doesn't know I've informed you, so if you decide to help you might want to let him know so as to avoid duplicating work).

Hmm... I might have got my wires crossed. You might only be interested in images of books - that's cool if so :) --kingboyk (talk) 13:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll fix any type of image that can be fixed, not just book covers :p Bláthnaid 14:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

That's brilliant, thank you. --kingboyk (talk) 13:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I guess what annoys me is with the exception of a few images I uploaded back in the early days, all my rationales already have the information that the bot is demanding. It's trying to create a policy where none exists -- there is nothing saying that template must be used, only that the information be included and I have done so. I will never upload any further images because as far as I'm concerned, in 6 months some tin god will decide what we have now isn't good enough, change the rules (unilaterally, probably) and we'll have to do this song and dance again. My viewpoint has now become if Wikipedia is so paranoid about image use (and no one has ever indicated one single bit of evidence to suggest anyone outside WP even cares, yet alone has made any sort of legal challenge over the use of an image), then it should become all-text. It would make WP look amateurish and stupid, but at least it would remove what I consider to be the No. 2 source of bad blood between WP editors, surpassed only by the "deletionists vs inclusionists" conflict that was recently profiled by the Associated Press.

Just for the record, I hereby give you permission to delete (don't bother archiving) any Bot messages that you deal with on my Talk Page. Feel free. Cheers! 23skidoo (talk) 15:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I see you're doing that now - thanks! There's a bunch of earlier ones but I'm going to go ahead and delete them too as they've either already been handled or they've been deleted by now. 23skidoo (talk) 20:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: List of disputed non-free album covers

Not at all, you can put links to any maintenance lists in my userspace wherever you want. I also maintain similar lists for other image types (see list of film posters with disputed fair use claim or without fair use rationale, list of DVD covers with disputed fair use claim or without fair use rationale and list of book covers with disputed fair use claim or without fair use rationale). I'm glad if they will be useful to somebody. I can create other lists on request and modify the way they are updated so let me know if you have any suggestions. Regards, Jogers (talk) 14:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Adding my accord here, as Jogers puts together the lists that you mentioned User:SkierRMH/List3. Let me know when you get this put together. SkierRMH (talk) 17:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Lists of disputed images

My bot intersects 22 different categories across each other, and is almost done with its run anyway. :-) east.718 at 15:40, January 5, 2008

Next time you need images from one of my trackers deleted, please send it over to me so I can do a category reintersection and we can avoid what just happened with Maxim. east.718 at 21:24, January 11, 2008

Done - thanks for fixing all these images. Are those lists ready for deletion? east.718 at 20:43, January 14, 2008

Disputed Images Fate/stay night

I see from above you have gotten many such comments, but I must also offer my thanks for your vigilance in updating the copyright errata. Keep up the good work! Terek (talk) 10:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Category:Disputed non-free images as of 1 January 2008

Is it O.K. to start deleting images in this categories? I think you said yes, but I'm double-checking.--Maxim_(talk) 20:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The 10000 image backlog

Are there any subcategories that are ready? --Maxim_(talk) 01:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I've done 'em all, anything more? Maxim_(talk) 00:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

I've given you rollback so it's easier to help me with the undelete mess. Maxim_(talk) 16:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Intervention appreciated

I appreciate your intervention to provide an appropriate fair use rationale for Image:Me and the orgone.jpg which I had uploaded. I was a bit annoyed by the bot's threat to delete it since I figured it was so obvious that fair use would apply here and I didn't feel I had the zest to do this myself. The next time I happen upon this situation I will have your work to guide me. __meco (talk) 17:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 14 January 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article What Was Lost, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 02:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

One for you

Another user has added a more detailed image rationale for the lead image at The Illuminatus Trilogy which I uploaded more than a year ago but I fear it won't be good enough should the bots find it. When you have a moment, although to my knowledge it hasn't yet been tagged, could you add the full template? It'll probably save me (and you) from getting the bot message later. It might not hurt to contact the editor who made the change, too -- if this person is adding these partial rationales to image pages, and they're not good enough for the bots, it's probably a waste of the person's time unless he/she starts using that template. Thanks. 23skidoo (talk) 15:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

My understanding is that, while the rationale template is not mandatory, the lack of said template is what's triggering the bots. That's one reason, so I understand, why people are so annoyed at Betacommandbot and a root cause of my own frustration. My assumption regarding this example is a bot would register that the "proper" template wasn't present and end up flagging it for deletion. 23skidoo (talk) 19:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

logo images

I've heard your good at writing large numbers of FURs for images. User:East718/DFUI/Logos has been pretty much my one-man operation for the last month. I'm starting to get burned out and a good 50% of the images are sourced and just need a backlink/generic rationale. Any chance you could help out or get some of the album people to help out on the radio station images (the four letter files beginning with M, K, W)? MBisanz ^talk 01:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Much obliged. You've almost motivated me to bear it out and install Firefox just to get the TW tool kit. Feel free to drop a line if you ever need help with something. MBisanz ^talk 04:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Denmasonry

Hi Blathnaid, I am not sure exactly under what terms this entry must be deleted, is it copyright? I can assure you that Denmasonry exists, as it is a project that I have embarked on recently. I am an artist from Yorkshire, and Denmasonry is the title of a collaborative project, and as I am a new user on wikipedia I do not have much of clue as to how the website works. I would be grateful if you might be able to tell me under what circumstances this entry may be reinstated. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimiconsuelo (talk • contribs) 12:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Saint book images

Just a heads up that, per our earlier discussion, Betacommandbot is now going through the various Saint (Simon Templar) book covers and tagging them for deletion. Since I didn't upload most of them initially, I'm not getting the notice. I can provide you with a list of the ones flagged so far if you want to save some time. A couple more Matt Helms have also been flagged but I see you're on top of those. Thanks again for your efforts! 23skidoo (talk) 15:19, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Don't worry about magazine images that might get flagged like the Starlog one. That one was uploaded before magazine covers were effectively banned from Wikipedia so if they die, so be it. 23skidoo (talk) 15:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Cheers

Thanks i'll use sandbox from now on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonno316 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

FURME

So I buckled down and learned how to use firefox and furme and twinkle. Wow, those scripts are amazing. SO far I've processed all of the 500 source identified image backlog! Thanks for motivating me MBisanz ^talk 21:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Jacen Solo

Partially as a result of your vote to keep the article, the AfD resulted in "no consensus". Since you are convinced that Wikipedia should have an article on Jacen Solo, please stand by that and help get this article to the bare minimum encyclopedic standards. This includes a complete rewrite from a non-in-universe perspective, accompanied by reliable, third-party secondary sources.

If however the article has not been brought up to this bare minimum within the next 4 weeks, I will consider resubmitting it for deletion.

Regards, User:Dorftrottel 02:42, January 30, 2008

DYK

On 30 January 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Beaufort Island, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wizardman 14:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Quick request

In the future, if you could use {{Film}} instead of {{FilmsWikiProject}}, I'd be very grateful. Although the latter one automatically redirects to the former, it has been deprecated, and we're trying to phase out its usage as task force tagging slowly occurs over the next year or so. Knowing that it's not being added to new articles would put me greatly at ease. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Book image

The book image for The Castle (novel) just got deleted. It was not one I had uploaded so I never got the notification for it. My concern is I think the image was of a pre-1923 edition so it shouldn't have been deleted in any event. Maybe you can put this on your to-do list to check out when you have a chance. The original uploader has also been flooded with bot messages, by the looks of his talk page. 23skidoo (talk) 17:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks again for your efforts! 23skidoo (talk) 19:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Chiquibul National Park

On 9 February 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chiquibul National Park, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 16:03, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Help - the bots are attacking me!

My talk page just got flooded with about two dozen bot notices, almost all of them for books. If you have the time, feel free to dig in (and please delete the bot notices when you're done). This is the epitome of why I think the inmates have taken over the asylum. 23skidoo (talk) 14:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks as always. It's not putting me off editing, it's just annoying me because the bots have crossed the line between notification and spamming. It's already had the effect that I no longer upload images to Wikipedia, though and I am not alone in that. By the way, apparently someone has created some sort of bot for doing the templates, see FURME. 23skidoo (talk) 15:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I just read the administrator noticeboard discussion about the bot (see [Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Betacommand here] for entertaining reading. Reading between the lines I have a feeling we're going to be absolutely flooded in March. For this reason if I remember to do this, I might completely lock down my talk page temporarily at the first sign of flooding, meaning no one will be able to edit it. It's bad form, but it's the only way I can think of saving my talk page. 23skidoo (talk) 17:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

[[Media:]]

Thank you for your welcome! I don't have time to be a really serious wikipedian but I'll try and contribute as much as I can! SeamusSweeney (talk) 14:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image category trackers

Hi, Blathnaid! I'll run the tracker now. east.718 at 20:23, February 15, 2008

Junkie

No, I didn't scan that one (wish I did - that book is worth about $500). It was one of the first images I ever uploaded, I believe, and I think it was provided to me by the webmaster of a site that included pics of the various editions of Burroughs' books. Thanks again for all your work on these. 23skidoo (talk) 20:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I've seen only two copies of this book in person, myself - one behind glass in an antequarian bookstore here in Calgary, and another copy (the $500 one) at a collectors bookshop in West Hollywood sitting next to a book signed by Queen Victoria and a signed first edition of one of JFK's books. I live in hope of someday stumbling across a copy of this in a garage sale somewhere. 23skidoo (talk) 20:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

actung verboten imagin die die . please don't delete any images until this insane policy reversed. go raibh meal a maith agut Opiumjones 23 (talk) 00:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The Castle

Here's another image to resurrect if you have a moment: Image:The Castle.jpg from The Castle (novel). I have no idea how long this one's been gone. I don't think it's one I uploaded; in fact I think it might have been a public domain cover predating 1923 but I can't be certain. 23skidoo (talk) 16:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Adminship?

I've noticed some of the excellent work you've done at AfD, writing fair use rationales, and in many other areas. Are you interested in applying for adminship? I think you'd make a great candidate, and I would be happy to nominate you if you are interested. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 07:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Blathnaid! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page.

Finally, I'd like to appologise for any delay, and wish you luck with VandalProof! Ale_Jrb^talk 19:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 11 March 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mervyn Cowie, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - 1st Coordinators Election

An election has been proposed and has been set up for this project. Description of the roles etc., can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators. If you wish to stand, enter your candidacy before the end of March and ask your questions of anyone already standing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators/May 2008. Voting will start on the 1st April and close at the end of April. The intention is for the appointments to last from May - November 2008. For other details check out the pages or ask. KevinalewisBot (talk) 12:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Logo work

Do you have any free time to tackle User:AWeenieMan/furme/DFUI/Logos with FURME? There could be a barnstar up for grabs if you do... MBisanz ^talk 05:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

		The Business and Economics Barnstar
		For helping defend companies' brand images on Wikipedia. MBisanz ^talk 13:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 16 March 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gran Paradiso National Park, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congratulations! --Espresso Addict (talk) 03:43, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you please check this image page?

Things seem to have quieted down on the BC bot side. I got a minor flood from another bot a few days back regarding some orphaned images, but in those cases it was because the pics wre replaced by images of first edition books, which was OK by me. I can only hope that now that the deadline has passed we've seen the end of this unpleasantness. That said, I do have one image page that I was wondering if you could take a look at here. It has no "rationale template" but it's unusual as in that case I actually was able to get direct permission from the copyright holder of the image to use it. Maybe there was something there that let the bot skip over it, but now that we're in the era of "speedy delete" I'd hate for some bot or enthusiastic editor to come along and deep-six it. Do you think the template is needed there? (PS. I actually don't know how to do the Barnstar thing, but you definitely deserve one for your work on the images!) 23skidoo (talk) 21:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Beeston Castle

Thank you very much for taking the time to review Beeston Castle. For a first GA review that was astonishingly thorough; in fact it was astonishingly thorough full stop. I'll have to curb my enthusiasm for your GA reviewing skills until you've passed the article though. ;-) I think that all the points you raised have been dealt with now, so whenever you have a spare moment perhaps you'd like to check it again. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Question from Horsebird

Hello Blathnaid - Thank you for your welcome note. I am a bit confused about the first article I contributed - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Miller

The note you left on the top of the article says, "This article or section includes a list of references or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks in-text citations. You can improve this article by introducing more precise citations."

I have listed active web links as well as feature articles about Steven Miller from well established magazines. The reference materials and links provide support for the content in the article as a whole. Placing in-text citations would be quite random.

It is especially confusing since many articles in the general category "American record producers" have even more detailed information included in the articles but in fact have no references at all. For many record producers and audio engineers who are notable enough to be included in Wikipedia, links for their credits (which are included in the Steven Miller article) are the prime documentation. It has been my understanding that frudulent information gets sniffed out quickly by those in the know. For instance, these articles have no references but if there was bogus info, people within that business would take note and suggest changes to content.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Lion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butcher_Bros. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Crowell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Douglas_%28record_producer%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ED_Denson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Margouleff

Please advise me what to do. Also, I am a bit unclear where as to where I should look for your reply.

(Horsebird (talk) 00:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)HorsebirdHorsebird (talk) 00:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC))

Reply from Horsebird

Hi Blathnaid -

Thanks for explaining the note at the top of the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Miller

I have read the information about the various citation styles and can envision using a variety of those styles for different kinds of articles that I might write.

Now that I am clear, you would be so kind as to remove the note.

All The Best (Horsebird (talk) 21:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)horsebirdHorsebird (talk) 21:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC))

Blackstone Hotel

I am a little more than an hour from day 7 of the GA on hold period for Blackstone Hotel. You and I have both put a lot of time into the article. I still have one more item to attend to on your checklist. I also hope to pass by the hotel tomorrow and take pictures if the weather is O.K. I may need another day or two.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The problem with the current main image is that the NYTimes photo seems to indicate that there was some roofwork not depicted in the current main image. My photos may be too crappy to put in the article, however. We will see if I can get any decent shots.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 23:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Great weather for picture taking today! You are my captive audience for my image additions. Feel free to swap them around or make suggestions on swapping them. I think I have responded to all your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I am trying to track down how to cite the print edition.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I have swapped the ref. I am looking for a better one with more about the restoration detail though.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I just added two tidbits found while searching the Chicago Tribune archives.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I am adding more info from the swapped ref.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you going to add it at WP:GA?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)