User talk:Cfitzart

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello Cfitzart, 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! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Solipsist 06:21, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

...and that was a nice addition to the Pablo Picasso article. -- Solipsist 06:21, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

thanks!! :)


Contents

[edit] Image copyright

Hi - you have not placed a copyright tag on the Image:Joshua_Smith.jpg - is the image available in the public domain? Regards--AYArktos 01:38, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi I was just checking that.. sorry I dont think it is actually, should I remove it now?
ok I put a tag on it, is that ok? and is this how I should reply to you? or should I go to your page??

I was going to suggest that if the image was not copyright free you consider Image_description_page#Fair_use_rationale but that is what you have obviously done. Regards--AYArktos 01:57, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


[edit] A Bar at the Folies-Bergère

Hi Cfitzart - I added a short realism para to this article. I recently came across this painting in my art class and the realist aspect seemed heavily emphasized so I thought it might be pertinent. What do you think? (I'm new to wikipedia..so who knows..) Anyway, thanks. -- Sorna_Doon

Hi Sorna_Doon, sure seems like a good addition, most of what I wrote I copied across from one of my old essays. But the movement known as realism is usually thought to be before impressionism, mid 19th C. with painters like Courbet although many people have painted in a realist style at many times through history. Cfitzart 01:33, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Ah, of course. You are correct, I switched around the two movements. Fixed. Thanks for that. Also, if you used sources for your essay, would it be good idea to include them in a reference section? Sorna_Doon

[edit] Canberra Airport

I was just thinking about putting in an image. Thanks for that! I wonder if we can get a map? I've been looking at other airport articles, and I was able to upload an aerial photograph of San Francisco International Airport; it'd be cool to get something similar for Canberra. I was also thinking of contacting the management and inviting them to contribute to the article. --SuperJumbo 08:57, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

No worries, it was a pretty blurry shot, only one I had. Do you have a better one you could put up? Not sure where youd get a map because theyre usually copyright i think. Cfitzart 09:10, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
I've just checked my photograph collection and apart from a shot of a 737 showing Fairbairn in the background, I haven't got anything that says "Canberra". I'm not likely to be travelling again before February next year, so getting a shot from the ramp is problematic. I thought I had a shot of the terminal, but I was wrong. I also had a quick look at NASA image resources, wondering if they had a satellite image (which would, of course, be public domain) but it's a daunting task - they've taken a LOT of photographs! --SuperJumbo 19:59, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Australian National University Precincts

Any chance of getting an explanation of what is in each precinct? :) Ambi 04:27, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

hmm Ill try.. I only noticed yesterday that they had precincts when I saw a map there, I could give the location (north west etc) at least Cfitzart 04:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I saw your latest edit regarding ANU precincts. No issue with the content (not totally accurate but that is up to other editors to help) but I do have an issue with the redlinks. You surely aren't serious that they merit an article are you? Couldn't we let the content develop in the ANU page before we break them out. I realise a red link does not equal an article but it does infer an article might be possible.--AYArktos 10:52, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
I did sort of add them as an afterthought, it just looked a little better for something in point form. But ok I'll take them out Cfitzart 11:02, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
didn't want to take them out without asking and of course you might have been inspired ot articles on the subjects - and might still of course :-). Bolding might help for the time being to make the list look more ... je ne sais quoi - I will try--AYArktos 11:21, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
ok good I was just thinking of bolding them, Not really very inspired as I only found out that they had precincts yesterday when I saw it on the map over there! but maybe someone will be in the future Cfitzart 11:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ferris Buellers Day Off/Art

Hi, I have a question about the Ferris Buellers Day Off/Art page - would it not be better off as a section in the Ferris Bueller's Day Off article? We generally avoid subpages in the article space, and it would just make more sense on the actual movie article. Adam Bishop 23:11, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I just thought that it would interfere with the movie article showing thumbnails of the paintings.. but i'm not sure, I created that when I was fairly new to wikipedia Cfitzart 06:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bus

No problem. Could you take a look at the talk page of the article- Martyman has written up a geology section, but noone has really commented on whether they think it should or shouldn't be added. Thanks. --nixie 03:45, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Map

Good job on the map of the Aborigine communities. I realized that I said it would be better if you made a map of all the communities in Australia, but then I looked at the rather long list of all the aboriginals, and I concluded that it would be too difficult to draw such map. So, the map if fine how it is. --Hottenot

thanks :) its also that many of the names of the aboriginal communities are different from different sources which makes it immensely confusing, so I thought I'd stick to the ones which already have articles in the wikipedia for now Cfitzart 14:39, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mount Majura

Hi Fitzart - I hope you don't mind, but I was looking at some Australian articlesa and noticed that the panoramic picture you had of Mount Majura was pretty dark . I've tweaked the contrast and brightness with Photoshop. If you don't like the new look, feel free to revert, but I hope you think that it's an improvement! Grutness...wha? 06:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

No worries, it does look better from the thumbnail, though the new version isnt loading on my computer
Strange - the same thing's happening with mine. Was the original picture taken over to Wikicommons? If so, I might only have managed to change the thumbnail... Grutness...wha? 06:38, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
OK - I'll revert to my first attempt. And thanks for the comments about the new version! :) Grutness...wha? 06:46, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Surrealism Thanks

I am so very grateful to you for your intervention on the surrealism page. Even though I have done some work on Wikipedia, I still consider myself a newbie with regard to the whole social and interpersonal and juridical structure, I just work on a set of articles that I either know something about or am particulary interested in, trying to be a responsible editor to make Wikipedia as good as possible, and I haven't yet participated in voting for things or arbitration procedures or any of that stuff. But recently I came across a description of a Wikipedia troll and have been starting to think that at least one of the people who writes on the surrealism page is probably a troll, because he reverts things and won't participate in a rational discussion and says or writes silly or absurd or babyish things both in the surrealism article itself and on the talk page that seem designed just to irritate and harrass and cause conflict. In any case, I feel quite lonely on that page -- although one or two other well-intentioned editors, such as SparkIt, have fortunately jumped into the fray occasionally to make things better -- so sometimes when some of the irrational or hostile or childish or trollish people go back and revert the article to something silly, I feel like I don't even have the energy to correct it, especially when I feel that I'm alone in caring about it. So your intervention gave me a renewed feeling of energy and that it's worth caring and worth trying to do something constructive regarding that article, and it felt like an act of solidarity on your part that is an example of one of the best parts of Wikipedia. Thank you so much. Jeremy J. Shapiro 05:27, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

No worries, looking back through the archives it does look like one or two of the editors there dont care much for the community opinion Cfitzart 03:26, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Indigenous Australians

Re your edits to this article - please note that we are saying "indigenous Australians" and not Aborigines. Also dates need to be wikified (1881). Adam 05:57, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

No doubt they refer to themselves as all sorts of things, but we have to have a consistent usage. Not wikifying dates makes work for other people. Adam 06:45, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I dont think youre ever going to have (or should even try to have) total consistency in a public encyclopedia. Wikifying dates just creates more work than is necessary, but I have no objection to anyone else doing it. Cfitzart 09:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Wikifying dates is good practice. For one thing, a properly Wikified date displays differently according to the user's preferences, so that the same date will display as British or American format. It is also handy to have a link to the year being referenced, so the reader can gain a feel for what else was happening in the world in that year, or indeed, on that day. --Jumbo 10:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Burke and Wills

No, I don't have a particular interest in the B&W expedition, just a general interest in Australian history. Sorry, I don't know the answer to your question about Cooper's Creek. By the way, I had a look at your photo gallery, and all the photos except 1 were downloading OK on my computer. The first photo brought a tear to my eye - my alma mater UC (although when I went there 1975-84, it was still called the CCAE). I like the rest too. I lived in Canberra 1974-2002, so I know a lot about ACT/Canberra stuff. Hope I can be of service at some time. Cheers JackofOz 06:55, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Australian collaboration of the fortnight

Hi. You voted for Sport in Australia in the Australian collaboration of the fortnight. It has now been selected for the current fortnight. We also need new nominations for the next round. Thankyou. --Scott Davis Talk 09:12, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your gallery - works OK for me

Hello, I just idly clicked through to your user page after seeing your response to me on the Art Portal talk page. Just to let you know, all your gallery pictures appear OK when I look at it, so perhaps it is - as you suggest - "just your computer". Although I'm at a loss as to what would cause such an upset. --bodnotbod 06:21, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

ok thanks, I dont know what it is either Cfitzart 12:25, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Namadgi Rock Art

Nixie asked me if I had any pictures of Namadgie rock art. I can't help but I thought you might have some. Your gallery is loading very slowly and I can't see all the pictures. I suspect it might be an issue with wikipedia servers. Regards--A Y Arktos (Talk) 23:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

A still in copyright image from the National Library is at: http://nla.gov.au/nla.pic-an9632562-1 --A Y Arktos (Talk) 01:16, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
sorry, havent been out there. Ive also noticed pictures being slow lately Cfitzart 13:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright considerations concerning A Bar at the Folies-Bergère

I have tagged A Bar at the Folies-Bergère with {{copyvio}}. You appear to have started it with some text from an essay [here], an essay that it looks like you wrote yourself. However, according to the Essay Depot's policy, " All images, coding, essays, and pages cannot be used without the prior written consent of this web site." That's not compatible with GFDL. However, this painting wants an article, and there's a temp page waiting. NatusRoma 07:26, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, yes I did use the essay which I wrote to start it, but I edited it to include the sections I thought could be used in an encyclopedia. I dont think that you can put a copyvio notice on it just because another site that I released it to has a copyright notice. That would only refer to someone who isnt me using it. Cfitzart 14:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, but see Wikipedia:Copyrights#Contributors' rights and obligations. Essay Depot owns the copyright to that information, which means that you cannot release it under GFDL. NatusRoma 19:25, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
No they dont own the copyright. I own the copyright to it. I did not sign over my copyright rights to them when I submitted the essay. Their copyright notice is probably incorrect - it should say that the essay remains copyright of the writer Cfitzart 01:00, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

In law, copyright belongs to the author and is not aliented unless this is specifically stated in the contract- the user gets user-right, but not copyright. (This I know from being a freelance writer/photographer) PiCo 04:51, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merry Christmas

-). 04:48, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Westernart template

Hello there, nice work on the Western art template (which i suppose you made)! Thanks for adding it to all the relevant articles.

Husky 13:16, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arts -> Fine art

I came to see my earlier error, but I am quite sure that Arts = Fine art . I am going to recomment that the Category also be renamed to "Fine Art". Cutoff being something like "somewhere on Earth, you can get an MFA for it" -- Fplay 09:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I think Arts should get its own page, it is a different concept to art and fine art (possibly should be moved to "The Arts") - fine art means painting etc. whereas arts is much broader. There is a huge number of pages which link to 'arts' and I dont think they should be redirected to anywhere else, see here Cfitzart 23:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
From a category point of view: "Fine arts" is a subset of "Art". Everything that is a "Fine arts" go in that and everything else goes in "Arts". What other distinction are you trying to make? The corresponding pages are "Art" and "Fine art". There are also mainspace redirects for "Arts" and "Fine arts". -- Fplay 00:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] This is so stupid!

You want another example? Here:

BUT

Are you going to tell me now that there is a semantic difference between Performing and Performce? The user of the Browser infterface is going to say: This is bullshit. Let us not waste our time: We sort this out in the categories and then delegate the corresponding page to get the scope and definition correct. From a category point of view: "Performing arts" is a subset of "Arts". "Performance"-whatever will be redirects to "Performing art" or it will have to do with automiles or job evaluations or something like that. The user of the browser interface requires consistency in our nomenclature. -- Fplay 00:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Let us continue to the thread in my Talk page only, to avoid duplication. I will ping you here if I do not get timely responses. -- Fplay 00:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A Bar at the Folies-Bergère

Please do not remove copyright violation notices from articles. Doing so can result in being blocked from editing. Thanks. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 21:02, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Its not copyvio since I wrote that essay, but Ill edit it down anyway Cfitzart 04:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
If its not a copyvio, you can send an email, identifying yourself as the author or owner of the website its posted on, releasing the text under the GFDL to permissions at wikipedia dot org. They'll note the permission and then you're welcome to put it all back. There are more details at Wikipedia:Confirmation_of_permission. Hope that helps and happy editing :) .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 14:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cotter Picnic Area

Hi, because of the fire damage around the Cotter, I think dating of images is really important if known. Can you please indicate on the picture page when Image:Cotter river picnic area.JPG was taken? The metadata states 16 March 2003 but it seems awfully green after the January bushfires and I was surprised the playground was built that quickly, but maybe it was! Thanks. Regards --A Y Arktos 07:30, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

the metadata is incorrect, it was taken 25 feb 2005 Cfitzart 11:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stolen artwork in NGA

Interesting to see that the Getty is having problems with a stolen Greek statue. There's a stolen Burmese ceramic plaque in the NGA. You'll find it in the Asian arts area, a square green ceramic plaque showing two figures, kindly donated by someone who bought it from dealers in River City. I know tias because I was in Rangoon in 1988 when that particular temple was being looted - there's nowhere else that piece can come from, and no other way the donor could acquire it except through the dealers in Bangkok. What to do? PiCo 12:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The NGA plaque was a donation from someone, not a purchase. But it was undoutably originally stolen. It's very distinctive, and can easily be traced to a particular temple in southern Burma, near Bago. During the troubles in 1988 that temple was ransacked by locals, and the glazed plaques began appearing in the antique shops in River City, Bangkok. They were on sale for $2,000 each. I imagine the donors bought theirs there and later donated it to the gallery, from genuinely generous motives. Nevertheless, it's stolen. I was very angry when I saw it in the NGA, and will do some investigatiing. PiCo 21:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I checked this out a little. The plaque was a purchase, made in 2002. The legal situation is a little unlcear - original owners should apparently apply for redress within 6 yeqars, but six years of what? The original theft (1988)? The date of purchase by the nwe owner (2202)? The date at which they become aware that the new owner has possession? I'll look this up. My next step is to find out how much the Burmese know about this. I'll be in Burma sometime in the next few months and will try to arrange a call on someone in the archaeology dept of Yangon University. That plus a visit to the pagoda the plaque was looted from, plus maybe a call on some Thailand-based western journalists, and I'll have a a story. MEANWHILE, I was in the NGA on Saturday taking a photo of the plaque, and was tld that I was only just in time: all photography will be banned as of next week. So if you want to take some piccies for Wiki, do it now. PiCo 06:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:Canberra_busses_cropped.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Canberra_busses_cropped.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.

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 User talk:Carnildo/images. 16:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Kookaburras in the bush.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Kookaburras in the bush.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.

[edit] Your help needed re Ceiling of Sistine Chapel

Hi, Cfitzart, I'm also Australian , an Art historian/teacher.

I need your help with the diagram that you created for the Ceiling of the Sistine Chapel page.

  • The problem is that on the diagram and in part of the description (your part not the other guys) you have put the pics on the wrong end of the ceiling. Prophet Jeremiah and the Flood are on the entrance end, God separating light from darkness and Jonah are at the Altar end. Yes, it's the reverse to what you would presume, and it has philosophic and theological ramifications.

Can you please edit the diagram and put it right.

  • The names of ancestors that are on the triangular bits.

On the curved parts arching over the tops of the windows are the Ancestors of Christ. All labelled so there is no doubt. But the familes on the triangular sections are not labelled. We really don't have any idea whether they are the families of the people below them. I do not think that they are. I think that something far more interesting is happening in those little panels. Is it possible to remove the names and just write "family" which would be entirely accurate?

  • Thirdly, you have divided the nine large panels into two sections. Visually and thematically it falls into three sections.

1. Creation of the world 3. Creation and downfall of humanity 3. Story of Noah.

Now, when you look at the panels as groups of three, they become thematic and the fact that the scenes are not strictly chronological ceases to matter. I want to write this, but your diagram doesn't support it.

Sorry to have to ask you to fiddle around with it.

--Amandajm 10:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Summernats

The article mentions 2005 winners. I would have thought someone could either update it for 2006 or mention why the event wasn't on? Garrie 01:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Summernats"

[edit] Regarding the edits I made on Image:Berrimacourthouse.JPG

Hi Cfitzart. I recently Photoshopped (GIMP'ed actually) the image Image:Berrimacourthouse.JPG to remove an easel leaning against the wall and a parked car. I hope you don't mind, but if you do, feel free to revert it.

I just realised you uploaded it on 2005-08-22 and I re-uploaded it on 2006-08-22! It's a strange coincidence that I decided to upload it that day as I GIMP'ed it quite a few weeks before. — JeremyTalk 00:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Wetcanvas internet forum logo.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Wetcanvas internet forum logo.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. KWH 02:47, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I am sending this out to wikiart folks everywhere,

so please don't feel picked on. Here's my thing. I've been watching list of sculptors recently and have been weeding out the entries in red on the theory that this is an index of sculptors in wikipedia. However i have been reluctant to remove artists that I know or discover to be real, wikipedia worthy people, so am trying to decide if i should just do a stub - maybe a lot of stubs - of these folks or leave them on the list [I HATE lists with too much red - check out the List of Frank Lloyd Wright works for example.

For example, i checked out one, François-Joseph Duret (1804 - 1865) and discovered that there are at least two sculptors with that name, (1732 - 1816) and (1804 - 1865)- this one is the son - and both probably could comfortably be in wikipedia. I did have a rather bad moment recently when someone DELETED my article on Connor Barrett about an hour [maybe less] after I first posted it, on the theory that he was not wikiworthy [or something] and a lot of these fairly remote (in time and place from me) artists are a lot more obscure than Barrett. So, i would like to know that i have the support of the wikipedia art history community before doing this. Drop me a line, if you wish to sit down and be counted. Life is good, Carptrash 05:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC) P.S. although i do mostly American art i have contributed to lots on non-American articles including Aleijadinho, Ásmundur Sveinsson, Einar Jonsson, Gunnfrídur Jónsdóttir, Henry Moore, Ivan Meštrović, Ørnulf Bast, Rayner Hoff, and probably some others. I say this because most of the stubs I'm proposing would be Europeans.

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Nolan painting of ned kelly on trial.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nolan painting of ned kelly on trial.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 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Wetcanvas internet forum logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wetcanvas internet forum logo.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 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 18:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WetCanvas forum

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article WetCanvas forum, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. utcursch | talk 12:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Dickson_for_wiki2_046.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Dickson_for_wiki2_046.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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 12:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Imants tillers the age of oil.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Imants tillers the age of oil.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. Aksibot 18:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spam in John XXIII College (ANU)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on John XXIII College (ANU), by 130.56.36.2 (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because John XXIII College (ANU) is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting John XXIII College (ANU), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 09:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:William Dobell red lady 1938.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:William Dobell red lady 1938.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] invite

Old Parliament House


You are invited to the next Canberra Meetup
10th November 2007, 2:30pm, Old Parliament House Cafe


This box: view • talk • edit

Graeme Bartlett 05:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Mark rothko 1957 no 20.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mark rothko 1957 no 20.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will 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. Llorcs (talk) 08:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Fred williams landscape 74.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Fred williams landscape 74.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Aboriginal art memorial at the NGA.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Aboriginal art memorial at the NGA.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 (talk) 05:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Albert tucker mans head.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Albert tucker mans head.JPG. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)