This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hi LW, if you look at the main Einstein image, we do know where it came from, which is apparently needed for a successful claim of fair-use, so the Reich image is bound to be deleted at some point without that. The last image of him that was uploaded was deleted for the same reason. I've written more than once to the Reich Foundation (forget its exact name) to ask for an image, but they have never responded, which is unusual. Most people and organizations do respond to requests for images, usually to say yes, but with Reich, we've had no luck. I know other editors have tried too. SlimVirgintalk|contribs 07:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the hair is magnificent. [1] I think he spent too long in the orgone accumulator. :) SlimVirgintalk|contribs 10:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The article called 14 Points is short easy reading, for academic writing, and starts this way In this Letter, we wish to set a foundation for productive discussion and understanding by focusing on those areas where we find common ground with FEMA and NIST, while at the same time countering several popular myths about the WTC collapses. --Ihaveabutt (talk) 20:47, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
When adding links to material on an external site, as you did to Beat It, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:
If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;
If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead.
You also did the same with Billie Jean, Jam, Heal the World, and Wanna be Starin' Somethin'. Each of these edits links to copyrighted material and are unacceptable. Please do not add such content to articles in the future.DKqwerty (talk) 02:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
And how can i know, if these links are or not links with copyrighted material?!? It´s just a links...There are a lots of sites with lyrics songs... And Wikipedia block who intent to help anyway?!? My question now is, how is the difference between a vandalist and who try to help here (who calls persistent violators...) I´am scary now... I will think twice next time to edit something here... I think someone will put a virtual gun in my head to edited something wrong... This is the beggining to someone to disinterested to do something here, because a person has NO incentive as well...This is discouraging...This is the sad reality...And what the hell is this "hat" in my page...?!? Lightwarrior2 (talk) 08:37, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
We have already discussed why the JachinBoaz.jpg image is not convenient, sir. And I presumed by your not replying the last post of the correspondent discussions (Boaz e Jachin: imagem and Why?!) that you agreed to me. I even put a link to it on Commons, but you continue stubborn on, unfoundedly, reputing the image, and that on several languages of Wikipedia. What was all the work we had on discussing the matter for? You can see the references for the image by yourself on its description summary. Even Freemasons do not regard it profitable to History. Please do not make me take drastic measures. --Algorithme (talk) 11:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
This is a threat...?! I don´t play this game here... Really... i don´t undertand you... You are an atheist... Whats your problem about this picture?! I think this is a persecution of me... By the way... i made myself the portuguese article about Boaz an Jachin... Please, don´t touch it again... However, i saw you put another stub in this page... Thank you..If you have some idea where this image can be place, please, give me ideas or let´s make an article with it... what do you think?! Lightwarrior2 (talk) 12:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
As a responsible user of Wikipedia (and as a fluent speaker of Camões' language), I have (the right) to "touch" every article I can in order to improve it — although I prefer to do it in English. This is not a private property of either of us. It has been already suggested where your image would be convenient. Read the Religious Studies article (Religionswissenchaft, in German: 'science of religion'); you will perceive it is a secular academic field suitable even to atheists. It is not personal: by "drastic measures" I mean conducting the issue to administrators, because you ignored our discussion by reputing the "not trustworthy as to history" image. --Algorithme (talk) 09:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi there Light Warrior. I'd be happy to move the images to Commons :). However, I'm heading off to bed just now I'm afraid. As I've never moved an image to Commons before, so I will need to read up on it, and it will take a while. If you want to do it yourself (there are instructions at Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons), or get someone else to do it, please do :). Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 21:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey, that looks really great :). Good job. - Kingpin13 (talk) 08:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
You're more then welcome :). I'll let you know if there's a page which I'd like translated. Also, if you're keen to translate, you could keep WP:PNT on your watchlist. Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 18:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the award :), very kind of you :). And it's great that you've decided to hang around. Keep well, - Kingpin13 (talk) 21:38, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. Yes I do remember :D. Yes, I got the admin tools earlier this year, thanks for the congratualtions :). I've been very well thank you. Hope you have had or are having a good summer. - Kingpin13 (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Well images are one of my weak spots :D. But the problem here seems to be that one editor dissagreed that the images added much to the page, and removed them on that basis, and the images where then automatically tagged and deleted as they weren't being used (and were non-free). I suggest you try and see which images other editors think should be included in the pages. - Kingpin13 (talk) 02:01, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Well I can't actually think of any articles which need translating, but keep your eye on PNT. I think there's also a WikiProject somewhere for translating articles across the different language projects. - Kingpin13 (talk) 02:15, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Ditto. See you around - Kingpin13 (talk) 02:20, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
To be honest, I'm not sure. I think it's merely an incorrect license on the image. The triple tau falls into the category of a logo used by an organization, as it is the symbol of the Royal Arch, an appendant body of Freemasonry, so it could be considered fair use as a representation. Additionally, according to the information given on the page the image is drawn from, the triple tau was adopted in 1859, which I believe would also put it in the public domain. MSJapan (talk) 19:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I didn't remember. However, from looking at the earlier conversation, it would seem that what you uploaded wasn't attributed correctly, which I think was the root of the problem. The current upload is attributed, but, as I said, I think the license is wrong. Problem is, I'm not sure if I'm correct in this case, because I don't know a lot about image licensing as it applies to WP - even the poliy is somewhat complicated. Barnstars are a much simpler answer; they are given out by whomever wishes to give them, and don't have any particular requirements. MSJapan (talk) 16:15, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page.
Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.
![[1]](http://www.lifeenergysolutions.com/images/default/wilhelm-reich.jpg){kind=link}
