User talk:Boki 02

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Boki 02, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  (Bjorn Tipling 12:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC))

Contents

[edit] Dannii coconut image

Hi, the image you uploaded Image:Dannii coconut.jpg does not have a license and has therefore been nominated to be removed in seven days. If you can post a correct license on it's page, then the deletion notice can be removed. Howie ☎ 14:07, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Please do not upload duplicate images - especially as a way to bypass the original being deleted. Thanks. Howie ☎ 14:40, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks.

You are making edits to Wikipedia which are breaking the Manual of Style house style which users are supposed to follow. Please stop. These are the agreed rules which everyone abides by. Continuous changing of content in articles to break agreed-upon MoS rules, when you have been asked to stop, is often seen as vandalism. Constant vandalism may lead to you being blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Stop making edits please when they are unnecessary Howie ☎ 15:27, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Mos4 This is your final warning. Howie ☎ 15:33, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalising Dannii Minogue

Despite the warnings given, and the page being given a protected status, you have ignored everything and still gone ahead with editing the page. Therefore you have been reported to 3RR. Howie ☎ 16:31, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Victoria Beckham & Unsourced/Incorrectly Tagged Images

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

chocolateboy 17:49, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Marilyn Manson

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. 141.157.6.120 19:08, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dannii Minogue

You have reverted this article, replacing the existing image with your unsourced image, no less than seven times in the past 8 hours. I am therefore blocking you from editing Wikipedia for 1 day. Whilst you are blocked, please read our Wikipedia:Image use policy and our Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. When the block expires, I strongly encourage you to discuss the changes that you want to make with other editors on the article's talk page, Talk:Dannii Minogue. If you merely continue where you left off after the block expires, repeatedly reverting the article with no explanation (not even an edit summary) or attempt at communication with other editors, you will be blocked again. Uncle G 21:39, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

  • It wasn't administrators changing the image back. It was another editor like yourself. There are thousands of such editors here. You and that editor need to communicate, not revert war with each other. I've asked xem to talk to you here, and to give you a few tips on what sort of contributions on the subject of Dannii Minogue would be acceptable. You are permitted to edit this page whilst you are blocked. I strongly suggest that the two of you talk on this page. You can explain why you think that a picture of Dannii with blonde hair is better than a picture with black hair, and he can explain to you why he thinks that a high resolution picture is better than a low resolution one.

    Whilst you are waiting for him to come here, please review our copyright policy. Very simply put: Images and text are only acceptable if they are your own original work. Text that you copied from someone else's web site isn't your own work, and images that you downloaded from a Dannii Minogue gallery web site aren't your own work, either. Your "best pics" are not, in fact, your own pictures at all. Uncle G 04:14, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Well I have tried to communicate with you all through yesterday, and you chose to ignore every single thing I said. If you check the edit summaries on the Dannii Minogue page you will also see the comments which explain that I clearly stated that the original image did not need to be replaced at all. I am not a fan of Dannii Minogue - nor had I ever edited the page before you did. I just happened to see that you had replaced a perfectly good, clear, and acceptable image with (1) an image which was inappropriate (Ms. Minogue wearing nothing but a very small bikini), and when that was deleted, (2) a low quality image which did not portray Ms. Minogue as clearly as the image which was originally in the article. You chose not to listen at all to my edit summaries, or my requests for you to not replace the image and instead just replaced the original image over and over. Even when I asked for the page to be protected from editing, you still replaced the image and made no attempt to communicate with me, as I had done with you. I hope that you understand that your edits actually did not improve the article as the images you were using were simply not as high quality or were they better portrayals of Ms. Minogue.

Also, you must be aware that the images you have been uploading need to have a source given (such as a web address) and a license. The source is important so that the license can be verified. I see that the person who left a comment below this section has also given you information about this, so I won't go on further. Howie ☎ 12:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Single2light.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Single2light.jpg. I notice 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 argue that 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 can claim fair use use {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or {{fairuse}}. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

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. Thanks so much. --SCEhardT 04:36, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

This also applies to any other images you have uploaded. Please check them all. Thanks! -SCEhardT 04:36, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Dannii 2001.jpg has been listed as a possible copyright violation

An image that you uploaded, Image:Dannii 2001.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

chocolateboy 01:36, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:1998 dannii.jpg has been listed as a possible copyright violation

An image that you uploaded, Image:1998 dannii.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

chocolateboy 01:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Email

Hi. Thanks for your email.

Unfortunately, almost all of the photoshoot images you've uploaded are unsuitable for Wikipedia. I can guarantee you that most of them will no longer be on Wikipedia by this time next week, so your efforts to work them into Dannii Minogue will largely be in vain. Please take a look at the comments above and here to see why. It doesn't matter that other sites on the web copy images willy-nilly without attribution, in flagrant violation of copyright law. They're fansites. They can get away with it. We're an encyclopedia. We can't and won't break the law.

Please stop uploading images until you've read and understood Wikipedia:Copyrights. If you don't, I fear your stay here will be brief and unrewarding.

As for your edits to Dannii Minogue, that's none of my business. Why don't you discuss it with Howie, as suggested above? However, I should mention that reverting a compromise solution without discussion is unlikely to win you any friends.

Finally, please don't revert the {{copyvio}} notice on Girl (album) or Coconut (song). As with the copyrighted images you're uploading, pasting copyrighted text into Wikipedia may expose you (not Wikipedia) to legal action, and certainly causes a lot of unnecessary work for those of us working to keep the site free of vandalism, which is what persistent indifference to the advice of your fellow editors is regarded as.

chocolateboy 02:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Email #2

Re your latest email:

why do you keep deleting my Girl (album) page?

Because it's a copyright violation. Read the comments above and the message on the pages you keep reverting for more information.

i've given you all sources for all pics like you asked me for and why are you saying that you'll delete them

Because they're copyright violations.

Few evenings ago, I corrected all chart positions and you deleted them

I haven't deleted anything from Dannii Minogue (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs).

THERE ISN'T A SENTENCE ON WIKIPEDIA THAT HASN'T BEEN COPIED FROM SOME OTHER WEB-SITE AND YOU KNOW IT!

From Wikipedia:Copyrights:

  • Never use materials that infringe the copyrights of others. This could create legal liabilities and seriously hurt the project. If in doubt, write it yourself.
  • If all of the content of a page is a suspected copyright infringement, then the page should be listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and the content of the page replaced by the standard notice which you can find there. If, after a week, the page still appears to be a copyright infringement, then it may be deleted following the procedures on the votes page.
  • In extreme cases of contributors continuing to post copyrighted material after appropriate warnings, such users may be blocked from editing to protect the project.

chocolateboy 01:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Copyright Violations

You have been blocked from editing due to continued violations of our copyright policy despite repeated requests to stop. If you dispute this block, please contact another administrator who can review the block. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 17:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:Perfection.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Perfection.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Perfection.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Perfection.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)