User talk:Max Thayer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Max Thayer, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. 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! --Geniac 18:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:AlbertIImonaco.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AlbertIImonaco.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. 20:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jonathan Littell living in France?

Hello, Max Thayer! I see you've tagged Jonathan Littell as an American expatriate in France. However this seems to conflict with the lead sentence, which asserts he lives in Barcelona. Do you have any additional evidence on this point? Google finds a NY Times article on 7 November, published after he won the Goncourt, that asserts he lives in Barcelona, though I see that report is not yet cited in our article. EdJohnston 03:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion at User_talk:EdJohnston.
Littell has lived in France for many, many years, and speaks french almost without accent. If he now lives in Spain, then he qualifies for two different categories of expatriates. :) Max Thayer 00:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think we can justify tagging him for residence in both countries unless someone updates the article with properly-sourced information on when he lived in each country. Otherwise the new reader who sees both tags will wonder if we have our story straight. (At present the article text does not assert his residence in either country, which seems to imply both tags should be removed). EdJohnston 18:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Duclos.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Duclos.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 {{Non-free fair use in|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 04:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 04:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

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

Thank you for uploading Image:Megret.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. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image added to Saddam Hussein article

You can not replace a free image with an unfree one. The image you uploaded is going to be deleted anyway, so I am reverting back the article to the previous image. Caper13 18:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I really don't care what photo is used. I don't think that the current one looks stupid, but wouldnt object to a better one. Problem is, the current one is a free version, and you can not replace a free version with an unfree one...stupid looking or not. This isnt an aesthetic issue, its a copyright and Wikipedia policy issueCaper13 18:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
non commercial restriction is not free. Caper13 18:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
If you want an education in copyright, I will be happy to either give you one or refer you to someone else, but if you think that because something is on another wikipedia, then that means 'its free' then you don't know what you are talking about, and before you make a fool of yourself by calling my actions vandalism, you should make an effort to educate yourself a little bit more. Caper13 20:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Lets first look at the bearded Saddam Photo. See here [1]. If you click, you see that its copyright indicates that because it was taken by a dept of defense employee, the image is in the public domain, and therefore completely free. Anyone can use it for any purpose. If I wanted to integrate it into an advertisement for a beard trimmer, I would be free to do so, and that is how wikipedia defines a free image. The image has no restrictions whatsoever. Now, lets look at the other photo. See it here [2]. Look at its copyright tags...It is licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only". Wikipedia does not consider this a free image. In fact, if you continue reading below, they even explicitly say that..."only non-commercial or educational use of the file is allowed. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with this restriction on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial." In fact, Jimbo Wales himself said this on the subject [3] in announcing that all the non-commercial use and by permission only photos were going to be deleted from Wikipedia because they were not free images. This may not make sense, and whether it does or not is a different conversation, but the jist of this, is that the image you uploaded is not free to use on Wikipedia, and the 'bearded saddam' is, and you can not replace a free image with a nonfree one in the article. Hope this helps. Caper13 21:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Saddam Hussein.png

Hi Max, I'm a bit confused about your licence tag on this image. I find it highly unlikely that this has been released under a CC license. Only the copyright owner can do that. Can you tell us where you got this? --Stephan Schulz 22:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I was going to ask the same thing. Can you give me the source where you got this file. Uploading a file under phony copyright info is a pretty serious wikipedia offence, and I don't want to see you get in trouble over this. Thats why I want to check this before the image people do, because they will. Believe me. Caper13 23:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
There are serious problems with the copyright licensing on the image you uploaded. If you don't address the questions by the morning I am going to revert the article back to the previous picture and move to have thee photo you uploaded deleted. Please get back to us on the image questions ASAP. 06:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I am a little suspicious of that site, but I'll take their claims that the photo is Public Domain at face value. In that case, you need to update the copyright tags on your image to remove the CC license (as it is not licensed under CC2.5 with attribution...and additionally you do not attribute the photo to anyone) and add the public domain license. You should also add a link to the image source in case someone else questions it. Otherwise, the image is liable to be deleted by someone else due to the improper usage of the CC license. Caper13 23:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'm certain... The argument that using those Saddam photos is a "serious Wikipedia offence" because they happen to have a Wikipedia "fair use" tag stuck on them should be taken about as seriously as Baghdad Bob's claim he was citing "many authentic sources." Worrying about the enforcement of terms of use of photos of someone who was just hanged by a new regime under the law of the (defunct) Revolutionary Command Council in international copyright law is quite a bizzare case of groupthink. For future reference, whenever Wikipedia 'rules' are getting in the way of common sense and improving articles, rewrite them or follow Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. No one at Wikipedia is put at risk for using photos of Saddam reproduced by any other media outlet for free. 172 | Talk 09:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Roberthue.jpg

Same thing here. The image is obviously taken from here. I again very much doubt that this image has been released under the CC license by the copyright holder. --Stephan Schulz 22:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] vandalism

I read your note on my talk page, but I'm a little confused. Are there any unresolved issues you wanted me to deal with? - Nunh-huh 17:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Saddam_hussein.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Saddam_hussein.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. 10:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Renemonory.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Renemonory.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. 14:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Christianponcelet.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Christianponcelet.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. 11:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grendizer

Hi, and thanks for asking for my input. My knowledge on Grendizer is rather limited, but as far as I know it's included within the Mazinger family, and I believe it would be correct to expland articles such as Mazinger list of characters and the navigation box with Grendizer data. However, I'd advice you to ask other user who regularly edit Mazinger pages just to know what they think. Thank you, and please let me know what you think.--Mikaine 00:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi again; you're right about the Navigation box, I set up the original one, but since I didn't know many of the Grendizer characters I didn't include them in it fearing to make mistakes. Feel free to edit it, it's Wikipedia after all! :D Or tell me what articles to include and I'll make the necessary changes. About the categories I also believe that Grendizer is somewhat on its own category, even though it's part of the mazinger canon. Maybe Grendizer characters could belong to both categories, just a suggestion, I could be wrong. Thanks and hope it helped. --Mikaine 16:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I added the pages referring to Grendizer characters you have already created to the List of Mazinger Characters plus a couple more. I also created a Grendizer Character InfoBox and added it to the Duke Fleed article. Please tell me what you think. --Mikaine 19:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Omar3.jpg

I and another editor has asked a few questions about the license and other issues regarding this photo on it's talk page. Please reply there. -- Karl Meier 23:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Which was a blatant violation of http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4593044.stm. Please don't mistag images on purpose. Part Deux 19:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I see that you have a lot of uploaded images marked as pd-self which are clarly copyright violations. Do you understand that this is a severe breach of Wikipedia policy? Part Deux 21:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unfree images

Hi, I've listed your image uploads at Possibly unfree images. I encourage you to participate in the discussion; please realize, however, that screen shots, even if taken by you, are still copyrighted, and there are other images with clearly improper licenses, such as a claim that you created images of Mullah Omar or Saddam Hussein. I encourage you to learn up on our Fair use policy, to retag the images, and participate in the discussion. Thanks. Part Deux 20:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I am sorry if you felt offended by my reverting of your deletion of your images from the deletion log. However, as Part Deux has stated, these images are copyrighted, and the policy for their deletion is to place them on the lag, and then for the wikipedia community to deal with them there. This is in the community forum, and you need to release the policy for Fair Use. Please try to follow the wikipedia policies as it will maintain the harmony of wikipedia. Have a personally directed conflict with the User who is identifying intended or unintended violations of wikipedia policy by you is not a constructive solution. You may read over the wikipedia policies available to you, and if you have any questions feel free to ask. I look forward to your useful contributions. --Thank You. --Sukh17

Please, WP:PUI is the perfect place to have a discussion on your images. Note that no images are deleted from WP:PUI for fourteen days, so we are not in a hurry. --Iamunknown 07:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Max. Since you're running afoul of the rather arcane image copyright rules I thought maybe I could help with some advice, attempt to answer any questions you might have about Wikipedia's image use policy and offer to assist you in addressing the problems. This may all be very annoying, but unfortunately copyright laws are very strict and Wikipedia has to follow them. Try to specify on each image's description page where the image came from, such as scanning a paper copy, or a URL, or a name/alias and method of contact for the photographer. In addition, please mention who owns the copyright to the image. As a guideline, make sure that one of the following is true:

  • you own the all of the rights to the image (usually meaning that you created the image yourself and it doesn't depict the work of someone else), or
  • you can prove that the copyright holder has licensed the image under a free license, or
  • you can prove that the image is in the public domain, or
  • you believe it is fair use and have included on the image's description page a fair use rationale for the specific use of the image that you intend.

If none of the above are true, you'll need to ask the copyright holder to release the image under the GFDL or other free license. Wikipedia has a page at WP:COPYREQ that helps to explain how to go about requesting permission to use other people's work in Wikipedia. In particular, if they don't specifically agree to the GFDL or one of the other standard free licenses, they must agree to allow modification, redistribution, and use for any purpose, including commercial purposes. Finally, the image description page must contain an appropriate and accurate image copyright tag. If you like, I am more than willing to attempt to answer any question you might have. Just post them in WP:PUI in the section devoted to your images I'll try to get back to you quickly. I'll also try to respond to questions here, but I probably won't notice them as quickly. —RP88 07:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Gastonmonnerville.jpg

Max, I saw your question at WP:PUI, and I answered it there, but I figured I'd put a copy of my response here as well. The material from www.ina.fr, while free to view, is generally not in the public domain (the video in their archives is still copyrighted). In order to use their material without permission, we need a fair use rationale. A fair use rationale is an explanation describing why you believe it is fair use to use the material without permission from the copyright holder. In order to assist you I tracked down the source for Image:Gastonmonnerville.jpg and updated the image description with a source, license, and fair use rationale. My french isn't very good so you might have to fix some of the details in the source and fair use rationale. In particular, it would be good to add to the fair use rationale an additional bullet point explaining why this particular image is historically important. I used the {{Information}} template, but that isn't required, I just like the way it looks. Hopefully you can use this image as an example on how to fix your other images. —RP88 12:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Image:Laguiller.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Laguiller.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Geni 22:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Please stop uploading images under fair use rational. It is all too obvious that you have no understanding of what "fait use" means, and some of your rationals are blatantly untrue (for instance we do have free portraits of Rocard). Rama 12:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Alexeiluthor.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alexeiluthor.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. 12:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Omar3.jpg

Stop This is your last warning. The next time you upload an image with an incorrect license, you will be blocked. Part Deux 19:51, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] chill

Don't do this. Many people have brought up image problems to you. You need to read our image use policy and fair use policy. If you don't know how to handle an image, ask a question at the Wikipedia:Media copyright questions help area. Part Deux isn't trying to be a jerk; persistent violation of copyright law will get you blocked. ··coelacan 21:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading Image:Brainiacrobot.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. BetacommandBot 19:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC)