User talk:Photojpn.org

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

About photos-- Phil, please note that material does not become "public domain", but rather that the owner of the copyright grants publication on Wikipedia. Most material comes under the GFDL, which has some important differences from public domain. Other than that, welcome!Davejenk1ns 10:56, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] About prefecture photos

Hi - I just wanted to let you know that I'm not against photos in general, in fact I agree that including photos is a tremendous addition to an article. My only issue with the prefecture photos is the placement. Please don't take anything I've said as a request to stop adding photos (and, BTW, the ones I've seen are uniformily excellent). -- Rick Block 15:31, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Japan's intro

Photojpn.org, i read your message and want to apologise for making a mistake in my edit of what you wrote. i was obviously wrong about which islands belong to Ryukyu and offer no defense. in my defense as to the rest of what i wrote in the intro, i wanted to convey in the intro that only a few islands (say the 300 of Okinawa out of 6800 of Japan, as you said) are "significantly" far away from the four main islands, those few islands being the lower portion of the Ryukyu chain comprising Okinawa (which i admittedly incorrectly conveyed with what i wrote). moreover, the part of the page we re discussing is an intro and i don t myself judge Amami Oshima to be noteworthy to be warranted in the intro of the page on 'Japan'. Okinawa on the other hand is far more documented as being unique culturally, geo-politically, as well as by its relative geographic isolation from the rest of Japan, and deserves mention. (i would argue likewise that Izu shotō, and Ogasawara shotō south of Tōkyō are not worthy of note in the intro) Regards, Mayumashu 15:20, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I certainly am not going to change it based on what you have said in your reply. mentioning Okinawa as part of one of a few island chains that are located at a significant distance away from the main islands corrects the problem with what was written before which i agree there was prior to your edit. the other islands should definitely not be mentioned in the intro. 300/6800 is definitely describle as 'a few' (or 'some') (and not as 'many', say). why can we not say what i have changed of your edit a comprise - it leaves more than half of your edit intact? i resent being told i have my facts wrong when i had but one so. shall we seek further opinion by appealing for it on the article's discussion page? this is the last reply i ll make unless you can come up with new, better reasons for having done what you wish Mayumashu 00:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

like it, the new intro Mayumashu 14:15, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tokyo intro

Hi. I'd like for the Tokyo Tower to be before the infobox because the first thing a viewer should see if the most famous structure that the city has. WhisperToMe 00:41, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Even so, it is usually "thought of" as a city, even if it technically isn't one. Yes, I would very much like for the image to be at the top in Tokyo's case.

Tokyo is actually a "metropolitan area", by the way. WhisperToMe 02:53, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Whoops... if I knew about this, I would have voted! WhisperToMe 04:49, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I modified the poll according to your suggestions so that any image may be placed at the top. WhisperToMe 23:14, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WP:JCOTW

こんにちは。Aphaiaです。 お時間がありましたらWP:JCOTWの投票にご参加くださいませ（化けて編集画面で読みにくいので英語でも書いときます） If you have an interest, pleaee visit WP:JCOTW and vote, thanks. --Aphaea* 04:41, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] World cities

--Hi, why did you replace the photo of Tokyo with a picture of a bridge? I think the original picture showing the cityscape and urban sprawl of Tokyo was far more appropriate for that article. --Jleon 12:21, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Geisha

Hi, I don't see why your "person of the arts" is a better representation of the word geisha than "artist"? I think you're just overexplaning. -Himasaram 09:31, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] replied

Hi - just letting you know I replied here. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:46, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nagahama

Adjusted the table (and added an element or two for you). Hope that helps! --William McDuff 00:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry to see you go

Phil - Just saw your note on Talk:Tokyo. I hope you don't give up on Wikipedia... yes, it's anarchic, and yes, it can be aggravating, but it's still a beautiful thing. I think it's a good idea to take a sabbatical once in a while (and I've done just that on a few occasions), so maybe you can come back after a bit of a breather. This is a labor of love... it's so much more than any one person could ever hope to create... and you've clearly got the love for it. Stay well, and hopefully we'll see you around again; your contributions are always appreciated, even if they get edited (we all get edited!) - Sekicho July 2, 2005 00:16 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:Shiga-pref Small.png

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Shiga-pref Small.png. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media 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 media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, 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. Thank you. Stan 03:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I created it, but you've already deleted it, I don't mind. Photojpn.org 13:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:JapanPrefOkinawaMap.png

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:JapanPrefOkinawaMap.png. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an arguement why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified 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 media 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking 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. Thank you. Shyam (T/C) 17:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I created it, but you've already deleted it, I don't mind. Photojpn.org 13:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links

When it's something that you are making money from - and based on your name, I am assuming you own this site, and you just admitted it - then it very much comes across as WP:SPAM when you add it to a page - especially over FIFTY pages. However, I could be wrong - I ask you to ask people at WP:ANI about this, before you put back for a THIRD time what two people have already removed. Clearly there isn't consensus to add these at the moment, and putting them back on 50 articles will just heavily annoy people. --Golbez 17:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:External_links#Links normally to be avoided makes it pretty clear to me that adding links to your own site is discouraged. Neier 21:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Your arguments and rationalization are very weak. The rule where a person cannot add a link to his own site is totally unenforceable. Anyone can login as anonymous and add a link to his/her site. What are you doing about those links? How do you know if the person is or is not the owner of the external link's Web site? I have never tried to deny nor hide that it is my site.

If an IP leaves 50 links to the same site, I would delete them as spam just as sure as I deleted yours. --Golbez 06:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

If making money from my site means having a few Google ads which yield only a few dollars per month, then what about all those links to much more commercial sites? Corporate sites, local government sites which include ads for local businesses, etc., etc. Are you gonna delete those links too? They are all making money from their sites. And much more than I do.

As for having my links on 50 pages, it goes to show how much content my site has for Japan. The vast majority of Japan-related articles are stubs, and viewers will never get much info out of them. My links lead to more pictures and information which Wikipedia will never be able to achieve for those stubs. Photojpn.org 06:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you'd like to add that information to wiki? Or upload some pictures? --Golbez 06:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I already did so, but quit after encountering people like you hostile to my good intentions. You can check my early history and see what I contributed. It was good stuff. After you deleted my external links, you think I would want to help out?

I still await your explanation for deleting my links. Your arguments still do not hold. My external links are more helpful than the Wikipedia pages they are on. Photojpn.org 07:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Phil - Is there some compromise we can reach here? I, for one, am very glad to see you're back. Reading through Wikipedia:External links I think your site qualifies under "should #5". The issues are "avoid #3" (although all the avoids are only "normally" and I think this seems like a reasonable exception), and possibly avoid #4 (but this gets to intent, and I don't think you're adding these so you can make more money out of it but to actually add information content). How about if you only add links to photoguide.jp from stub articles (I don't know what Golbez might think about that, but it seems reasonable to me)? Or, (much better from Wikipedia's viewpoint) how about if you make your castoffs available under GFDL at some spot on photoguide.jp which would allow folks to copy them into Wikipedia (in which case the copy of the image file here would have a link to its source, which would be photoguide.jp). Or maybe you can think of some other arrangement that would be satisfactory from your point of view. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Fortunately, I no longer care. I may have overreacted, and it's just another sign that I probably need a break. I apologize for my tone, but I have already explained twice why. But I will not touch them again. --Golbez 21:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Rick, even though the avoids are "normally", #3 seems to trump any of the "shoulds" with even if the guidelines above imply that it should be. So, it would not be wrong to revert them. Phil makes a good point that anonymous IPs can add links; but as Golbez pointed out, an IP adding very many links like that would probably be reverted out of hand, without even checking the site to see if the content was useful or relevant.
Having said that, the pictures are very nice, and probably only got reverted due to the quantity of links being added at one time. (When I see an external link added to a site, I may check the contribs to see how many were added to other pages. That is usually a good indicator of intent. I can't speak for Golbez, but it may be the same with him.) In the case of the link re-added to Emperor of Japan, I would not have bothered reverting it were it not for the comment in the edit log. The reason I reverted it is documented above, and is technically the correct way. We can all disagree with that, but it won't change that rule. I'm afraid that if Phil keeps adding links from the same account, sometimes a miniature revert war will flare up again; and the reverters may need to be convinced one or two at a time that it is a good faith effort.
Offtopic: Phil, I noticed you have pictures of Sendai's Tanabata with copyright 2006. The festival is this weekend, so I suspect that the pictures are probably a little older than that; but if you're in Sendai now, let me know – we can meet for a drink, and I can try to convince you I'm not really such a bad guy.  :-) Neier 23:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Phil - I'm still interested in finding out if there's some compromise you'd find acceptable. Specifically, what would you think about making some section of photoguide.jp GFDL? If you do this, I think the photos you put up there will tend to find their way here and thus spread to all the wikipedia mirrors. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't take anything I say here personally. I am only pointing out the fundamental flaws of Wikipedia. And the weak ground you're standing on when you try to assert something or when your mindset is mistaken due to the flawed policies (allowing anonymous users, etc.) of Wikipedia. I will never ever contribute any more images nor text to Wikipedia again because of these policies. No chief editor means no control. No control means questionable quality. The best I can do is add external links to my site on Wikipedia's pages. And even this I cannot do when people think it is spam or a commercial site.

I was not trying to start a revert war nor cause any trouble. It was my little demonstration (now ended) on the flaws of Wikipedia. Disallowing people to insert links to their own sites, disallowing commercial sites, etc., etc. LOL. Whatever you say can be used against you. Anything unenforceable or impractical is useless. Have fun deleting all those links then. Are you gonna check each link to see if it has ads? That's the only way to go about it. It's too bad because there are many, many sites which are very, very useful, but (heaven forbid) they have ads. I now got a load of video clips too, and was gonna add a link to my Emperor's Birthday video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OACTnO6qks but better not. It has evil Google ads.

An explosion of YouTube links is happening on Wikipedia. Having 50 or more links to the same site is spam right? That's a commercial site right (Google ads)? I guess you now have to delete all those YouTube links on Wikipedia. Sounds like a lotta work. Have fun. Have even more fun trying to tell people not to link to YouTube. Let me know what happens. Meanwhile, I await an acceptable reason for deleting my links on Wikipedia. If you have none, put them back (all of them).

Neier, note that the year stamped on my images usually indicate the year when the images were first published, and not necessarily when the images were taken. Those Tanabata shots were taken years ago. Photojpn.org 18:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Chiyoda, Tokyo

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added to the page Chiyoda, Tokyo do not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Chiyoda, Tokyo, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
    and you must always:
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

Accounts used solely for blatant self-promotion may be blocked indefinitely without further warning.

For more details, please read the Conflict of Interest guideline. Thank you. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I read the guidelines for external links and disagree with your opinion that I do not comply with them. The links add much more info (images) to what exists on the respective pages. Just what exactly does not comply? Photojpn.org 16:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
It is not only the guidelines, but also the policies: wikipedia is not a directory of links (WP:NOT#REPOSITORY). Moreover, if I read the previous discussions on your talkpage, and I see your userpage, then you have a conflict of interest witht these links. Of the 61 links that were on wikipedia, 57 were added to pages where you edited (I would have to dig deeper to see if you added all 57 links, or that there is also coincidental overlap).
Regarding WP:EL, picture sites do not really comply with the statement "Such pages could contain further research that is accurate and on-topic; information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks); or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to their reliability (such as reviews and interviews)." Pictures can be uploaded to wikipedia, and wikipedia does not have to link to picturesites. Moreover, if I see your contributions list, most of your recent edits have been to external links sections, where you added this link, which wikipedia considers spam. I hope this explains, have a nice day. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

The links are not spam. Look at the page links more closely. They are for explaining places and things in Japan. The images are captioned. They are the largest collection of images in English for the subjects represented. Pictures can be uploaded to Wikipedia, but very few people do it. That's why there are very few images on the pages I've added a link to. That's why I add links to my photos. I'm not inclined to upload thousands of my images to Wikipedia. No one would do that. Photojpn.org 17:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia defines spam as "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed." And, as I explained, you have a conflict of interest with these links (which suggests that you are linking for promotional purposes). Also, that pictures are not uploaded is not an excuse to link to them, neither is the reason that other people do not do that either.
I also see that others have similar complaints (seen the other discussions on your talkpage), I suggest that you consider posting on the talkpages and let other, independent users make the linkadditions. Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

All the links go to different Web pages. They are not repetitive. They are not for promoting my Web site or any product. They are to show what the place or subject looks like. They are to promote better understanding of the subject. People are linking to YouTube. Same thing. Many people are linking to their own Web sites. Probably under a false username. But I'm honest and do not use any false persona. Your argument is still very weak. Photojpn.org 03:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Tokyo

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. Please consider adding your name to and monitoring Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Tokyo and any other subcategory at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Japan. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 23:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)