User talk:Theworld2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Theworld2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 07:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] License tagging for Image:IoofLogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:IoofLogo.gif. 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. 03:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Jimmy Cooper.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jimmy Cooper.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. 03:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Reith

Hey! Thanks for adding the infobox to the Peter Reith article. reith is probably as well know as the Workplace Relations minister as for his Defence ministry. perhaps the infobox should reflect his entire parliamentary career? Cheers, Wikipeterproject 07:39, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Penleigh and Essendon Grammar School

Hey Theworld2, you recently raised neutrality concerns on the PEGS talk page. I support your concerns about staff members removing former students from the alumni list which they think tarnish the schools image and generally trying to turn the article into PR spin. It would be good if you're available and able to join in the discussion with Michael Jongen, the "Head of Libraries". I have also had to semi-protect the article because IPs started edit warring over restoring Jongen's removal of Tweed and the Morans. Your input would be appreciated. Cheers, Sarah 09:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hello Theworld! Are you by any chance a past/present PEGS student? Cheers! 58.107.245.37 07:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Cranepooleschmidt.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Cranepooleschmidt.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. 10:05, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Liberalpartyofaus.jpg

Hello, Theworld2. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Liberalpartyofaus.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Theworld2. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Cranepooleschmidt.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cranepooleschmidt.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 09:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial use of Image:00000536-logo.gif

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:00000536-logo.gif, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:00000536-logo.gif is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:00000536-logo.gif itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 07:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial use of Image:MCC.gif

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:MCC.gif, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:MCC.gif is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:MCC.gif itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 07:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Geoff_Dickson.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Geoff_Dickson.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 {{di-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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 22:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:60MinutesTeam.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:60MinutesTeam.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. SMC89 ( talk • contribs ) 14:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Liberal logo on your userpage

FYI it will be removed sooner or later as fair use doesn't extend/apply to userpages. Timeshift 04:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:60MinutesTeam.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:60MinutesTeam.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 05:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Margaret jackson.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Margaret jackson.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 05:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Australia

I removed the party affiliations of the PM because I don't see them used in the vast majority of country infoboxes. United States is the most notable exception, but then again most Americans have party affiliations, so that's a somewhat different situation than most countries where party membership is a relative oddity. Kelvinc (talk) 18:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean party affiliation being an oddity as in the number of parliamentarians without party affiliations is quite large. What I should said is that party membership is an oddity: the ALP has a membership of 50,000 individuals, while the LPA should have a similar number. These 100,000 people are effectively responsible for pre-selecting all but two of the MPs you noted, since they either vote for the party executive or the candidates themselves in nomination meetings (I'm not sure about the specifics, but in Canada most candidates are nominated by constituency party members with some possibly parachuted in by the executive).
By contrast, this is what Politics of the United States says on the matter:

Unlike in some countries, American political parties are very loosely organized. The two major parties, in particular, have no formal organization at the national level that controls membership, activities, or policy positions, though some state affiliates do. Thus, for an American to say that he or she is a member of the Democratic or Republican party, is quite different from a Briton's stating that he or she is a member of the Labour party. In the United States, one can often become a "member" of a party, merely by stating that fact. In some U.S. states, a voter can register as a member of one or another party and/or vote in the primary election for one or another party, but such participation does not restrict one's choices in any way; nor does it give a person any particular rights or obligations with respect to the party, other than possibly allowing that person to vote in that party's primary elections (elections that determine who the candidate of the party will be). A person may choose to attend meetings of one local party committee one day and another party committee the next day. The sole factor that brings one "closer to the action" is the quantity and quality of participation in party activities and the ability to persuade others in attendance to give one responsibility.

In the United States, less than a quarter of the population are not "registered Democrats" or "registered Republicans" (see Image:Party affiliation USA.jpg). In Australia, less than 1% of the population are registered ALP or registered LPA members. That's what I mean by the difference in party affiliation. Kelvinc 17:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Another example: primary elections in the US. State governments, not parties, are responsible for holding what is essentially the equivalent of party nomination meetings, and participation is either open to the general public, or closed to the party but the party takes up a significant part of the population anyways. Can you imagine the Queensland state government (for example) running elections for the NP and ALP state party leaders, and then a significant portion of the population taking part, all before the general election? We live in countries where parties work in the system: the US has parties as a part of the system. That's the level of party affiliation I think we're looking for to have leaders' party affiliations added to the boxes. Kelvinc 18:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I apologize for going off track. My point is actually this: the overwhelming majority of country infoboxes do not show party affiliations of elected officials. The US is an exception, but I'm trying to say that it's probably because their party system is so bizarrely different from ours, and they seem to label party affiliations on everything that walks on two feet. Generally, if I see party affiliation added where it wasn't before, I would remove it purely for consistency reasons.
As for LPA membership, I'm going from sources like [1]
In case you feel offended by what appears to be misconceptions on my part, at the very least you should look at my old userboxes and take a guess at who I would vote for if I was Down Under.  ;-) Kelvinc 09:52, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
PS: or to put it another way, I don't know why there's no party affiliations on the boxes myself, and I'm not actually all that against seeing them. But if I was going to change it, I would probably change all 170+ boxes, and that's just way too much work.  :-P Kelvinc 10:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)