User talk:Nickbigd/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] License tagging for Image:JeffersonCityseal.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JeffersonCityseal.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:StMartinCoat.png

Hello Nickbigd, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:StMartinCoat.png) was found at the following location: User:Nickbigd. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 20:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Giovanna d'Arco

Just to let you know in case you are working on Verdi, the text you (correctly) reverted by Nrswanson originated here [1]. It seems this user has copied and pasted a large amount of material into the Verdi articles. Regards. -- Kleinzach 11:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Opera project

Oh dear.

I really hoped that you were wrong in your remarks on my talk page about WikiProject Opera, and (asuming good faith I hoped that you'd just been unlucky enough to catch them on a bad day.

There are some folks there with a bit of a tendency towards WP:OWNership, but I hoped that since most seemed fairly decent they'd be workable with. I think that most of them would be, but the others don't seem to have a problem with the editor who explicitly seeks to drive people out, and now I too have been driven out: see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Opera#A_redux.2C_then_over-and-out.

It's a pity, and it's very short-sighted. A project which drives people away can't claim to have consensus for what its members do, and without consensus it can't help guide work in that area. I Wikipedia didn't rightly take such a dim view of forking, there'd probably be grounds for an other inclusive Opera project.

Anyway, if discussion at the project is impossible, please don't allow yourself to be deterred from working in that area. There's no need to participate in a project if it doesn't want you, and a project doesn't own the articles. Good luck! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:31, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please slow down with the "expand" tags on Ercole de'Roberti

Sorry about that, its just that I am at work and I have a very easy job with hardly any work to do, so I spend most of the time on wikipedia. I will leave it alone from now on. AdamJWC 06:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Composer infoboxes

You recently spoke, on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera, against the blanket removal of infoboxes from articles about composers, or in an attempt to reach a compromise solution. Despite around a dozen people doing so, there are claims that consensus for their blanket removal was reached. You may be interested in the ongoing debate on the former talk page. Andy Mabbett 10:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Raffaello da Montelupo

Updated DYK query On 21 May 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Raffaello da Montelupo, 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.

--Aquarius • talk 21:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Ciao!! As per WP:Manual of Style, places of birth and death should be list in-line in the article, not near the corresponding dates. Also, I changed the name sued to refer to him 'case "da Montelupo" was not the true surname, so it sounds a bit ridiculous to call him "Montelupo". It is not a case in which by tradition he has become "Il Caravaggio" or similar. Yes, I am from Rome of course. And of course it is the most beautiful city in the world... I say it not because I want to boast, but because it's the sheer truth. Let me know about everything you need to know about Italy!!! See you soon and thanks. --Attilios 09:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Ciao!! Of course, I didn't want to be offensive. I'm not angry against Wikipedia users, but from those who edit the source which Wikipedians use in turn. You can't imagine how many ridiculous typos I found (last one... Bacciochi instead than Baciocchi repeated ALL times in the Elena Bonaparte article...) I can't see why. I seem, when Italian sources use English words, I never found so many typos (rarely one, in fact, and this when Italian writers are often among the most ignorant ones, I admit it). Why instead English authors make such stupid errors in dealing with my language? This is a giant mystery... As for our case, "Il Crocifissione" is clearly wrong like Bush's brain, as "Crocifission" is feminine, and "Il" the masculine article. it's clear the the Commons editor was not Italian, unfortunately. Let me know... see you soon and good work.

[edit] Annunciation (van Eyck)

There's an edit war ongoing with a frantic, Wiki-illiterate editor who doesn't accept my Wikifying of his (her?) article. Help is needed to reach a consensus about a decent version will kept here. Can you help? Thank you. --Attilios 11:30, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading Image:June_la_fille.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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:D_Zajick.jpg

I have tagged Image:D_Zajick.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:June_semiramide.jpg

I have tagged Image:June_semiramide.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Anderson_daphne.jpg

I have tagged Image:Anderson_daphne.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] June Anderson images

Regarding your note on my talk regarding the fair use ablum covers marked as orphans. The debate about the their use in articles continues here. My understanding (though I have not been following it dilegently) is that the use of an album cover could be usable on a article about the album if a proper fair use rational is written and comments are made about it in the article. The cover is not usable in a simple list of ablums released (basically using the image as a bullet format for each entry). These lists may exist as part of an article on the artist or in a "List of..." type article. My suggestion would be to read through the discussions (there is a lot - its been going on three days now) and if you feel that the way the images were being used is acceptable, be bold and re-add them. If you do re-add them, I suggest starting a discussion on the talk page of the artist or album's talk page giving your reasoning for the re-add. If you make the images non-orphans, your welcome to take the orphan deletion tag off the image page. If there are any other questions, please feel free to drop me another note on my talk page.--User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 01:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photo copyright

I see you are putting up some old photos and I am interested in doing the same. Do you understand the limit of copyright as 70 years from first publication, say as a postcard? Is this US law? Thanks for any guidance you can give on this. -- Kleinzach 09:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading Image:Sills.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 02:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] June Anderson GA fail

Hey Nick. I've responded to your comments on my Talk Page. Please let me know if you have any further comments or concerns, I'm more than happy to help. Drewcifer3000 00:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use disputed for Image:Popp.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Popp.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 23:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)