User talk:Ed g2s/Archive11

Regarding the Arirang image

I was not aware someone put a "fair use" tag on that photograph. All I know is that the author has given his consent for the image to be used on wikipedia, and it is one of the few (good quality) N. Korean images we have here. Perhaps you could take another look. Myciconia 06:45, 4 June 2006 (UTC) [reply]

I'm very sorry to hear they must be deleted! Was the last editor wrong to label it "fair use?" Myciconia 18:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Image:Keratoconus1-800.jpg

I actually work for the Indiana School of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology. We have literally thousands of teaching photos in various formats, mostly in slide format, though we are mostly digital now. This image was one image from a stereo slide taken sometime during the 1970's or 1980's. --Barista | a/k/a マイケル | T/C 18:00, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got the image (and Image:Cornea_transplant800.jpg) from our head photographer at the time. I told him specifically that I wanted the images to post on Wikipedia, to accompany the appropriate articles. I also remember asking about licensing. IIRC, he said his only concern was that the images be attributed to the department. He didn't specify CC or anything else, so the choice of CC was mine. --Barista | a/k/a マイケル | T/C 23:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio image

Thanks for removing that copyvio image, I'll look at the metadata first in the future. Cheers, jaco♫plane 17:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:UN flag.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:UN flag.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

--Sherool (talk) 19:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copy-vio

Can you work your copy-vio magic on Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Dubrovnik? Thanks, -Ravedave 02:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -Ravedave 17:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Box art galleries

A number of computer and video game articles have 'Packaging artwork' chapters in them containing art from past and present releases, some I've created myself when I didn't know any better. I would appreciate if you could take a look at the Gradius III article (bottom of page) and determine whether these can be included or not. Thanks ~ Vic Vipr 09:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have one more thing to ask of you, List of Virtual Boy games requires the attention of an experienced user in the field. Vic Vipr ^T_C 09:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The author of this list is quite stubborn. If you're not busy, could you stop by the discussion regarding its FA nomination? Vic Vipr ^T_C 19:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transparency

Hi! For coincidence, I've noticed that you included a transparent background in this picture - Image:Portugal FPF crest.png - I know it was a long time ago, but would you make the same with Image:Blank pt CoA.PNG? I don't have the needed software, and as you seem to be able to do it, I decided to ask you for it. If you just can't, don't bother. Thanks anyway! Afonso Silva 09:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Afonso Silva 15:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI UK Royal Coat of Arms

commons:Template:Deletion_requests#Image:UK_Royal_Coat_of_Arms.png--E-Bod 06:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ed,
Thanks for amending this template to use <span>; my HTML is rusty and half-forgotten! Best wishes, David Kernow 11:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PlayStation 3

Please do not revert to the "free" image, this image is wrong and should not be used to depict the PS3. If you have any questions, please use the talk page. I would also suggest you read the talk page in it's entirety, as it has allready been established that the image is wrong. Havok (T/C/c) 09:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sig Image

Be aware that the page you linked to clearly states "This page is considered a guideline on Wikipedia. It illustrates standards of conduct that many editors agree with in principle. Although it may be advisable to follow it, it is not policy.

Furthermore, there are many users, including admins such as Alkivar http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Annieville_Elementary_School] that have an unobtrusive tiny picture in their signature line. If an image was gargantuan, I could understand, but the practice of a 20 pixel image in a sig is nothing to single an individual out for. -- Daniel Davis 18:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite, but I wasn't telling you to remove it... ed g2s • talk 19:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Reasoning for removing Fair use

I have made a critical Comment about your editing and it would be unfair for me to talk behind your back so I am Informing you.

I did not mean this Edit to be uncivil or Hurtful and I only meant it as a forceful Recommendation for you. I Apologize in advance. The comment is about how you are Removing Fair use Images Where the Policy says we are not allowed to use Fair use images and Several People are support you for that, However you should stop Removing Fair use images because your reasons for removing the Fair use images is wrong and only Complicates things.

If you feel my comment was too Whatever on the fallowing Talk page you may replace it with my comment above . However don't just remove it and call it a personal attack because i did not mean it that way. Your are Trying to help when you remove fair use but you apparentely can't explain yourself and you are making it a lot harder for other Fair use Enforcers to Reexplain why the images can't be used because you don't Cite your policies and your reasoning is wrong. (If your reasoning was right we would be allowed to use the images, however we are not allowed to use the images for other reason)

Talk:List_of_Lost_episodes/Use_of_images#Policy_is_not_being_debated_here

I Apologize for the comment i made but it needs to be said

Also I would like to Inform you that Ned has, Despite his strong pro image POV, removed fair use images from the page while the discussion was still going on. You should keep this in mind that he is arguing we should be allowed to use Fair use images but Will not re add the images himself while we are talking about it.

I don't Know if i will be able to respond to you for a while. If you remove my comment place cite my permission to you to remove it so you don't get attacked for removing the comment.

Thank you --E-Bod 23:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of fair use image from my user page

(Fair use image(s) not allowed outside main namespace (WP:FUC #9) (please see user:ed g2s/Fair use for further explanation).)

From the looks of things, you get a lot of attacks from people for edits like this one... but I just came here to thank you for bringing the misuse to my attention! Seb Patrick 11:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation request

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/List of Virtual Boy games, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. Since you're such a rules stickler I would think you would have the sense not to cause a revert war out of this and seek to get it resolved like I specifically asked for. --SeizureDog 12:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Puerto Ricans

You have just removed all image from List of Puerto Ricans. What talk apge am I supposed to see for your explanation? Why did you remove public domain images? Cann't they be used in the list? Joelito (talk) 17:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining but why should I now readd the pictures when it was you who removed ones that WP:FUC did not apply? Joelito (talk) 18:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into this. We probably need to get some more community awareness about the issue of decorating lists with unfree content. I know that you've done some thinking about it already. Jkelly 19:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert of List of Lost Episodes

Recently (at 18:20, 19 June 2006) you reverted List of Lost episodes to a version that does not include the illustrations of the DVDs. You cited 'not discussed therefore not allowed' as your reasoning for this edit, and I am assuming that you believe WP:FUC prevents the DVD illustrations from being used; however, if you were to read the policy properly, you would find that the DVD pictures most certainly are covered by fair use (go through the points and check them if you must)- the pictures clearly illustrate the DVDs that are discussed in the 'List of Seasons/DVDs' section of the article, therefore they are acceptable under fair use criteria. There is also a template that demonstrates that use of DVD covers qualifies as fair use.
Finally, as you are aware, there is an ongoing discussion on the talk page of the article concerning both the use of DVD cover pictures and the use of episode screenshots. I advise you to discuss the matter first under the DVD Covers topic, as it may appear to some people that your lack of co-operation with the editing community shows that you only wish to disrupt the quality of this article (perhaps to prove a point), which may explain the accusations of you behaving in a dick-like fashion. Overall, the way you handle such situations as this could be drastically improved, especially seeing as you have taken it upon yourself to enforce supposed fair use violations, therefore you need to be able to justify your views to the community who may be opposed to your sudden and disruptive edits to the articles to which they contribute; your manner, behaviour and way you conduct yourself on wikipedia all need to be improved if you wish to avoid future confrontations, edit wars and general disruption.
P.S. I hope you can take this constructive criticism to improve the way in which you handle this situation and others (see Dick-behaviour Remedies for further notes and pointers). --Temers 19:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"DOnt need a screenshot to identify a game"

Actually the easiest way for readers to identify video games is with a screenshot and Halo in particular is very notable in context to the system. I do not think there is any problem with keeping those screenshots in Xbox, as they are contextually relevent and there i hardly any fair use imagery on the page. --larsinio (poke)^(prod)

Can you tell me what the difference is between my usage of screenshots on Xbox and what was used on NES ? I feel NES, which is an FA, would fail your criteria. --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 18:07, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you remove the screenshots because they were violating policy or because they dont have a "strong reason" to be there . --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 18:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your're into infobox syntax...

Have a quick look at Template:Infobox London. It might need some cleaning up. Thanks. Mrsteviec 10:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

London infobox

Hi - you recently reverted my revert of {{Infobox London}}. Please read the relevant discussion pages before making assumptions about whether or not edits are being made by consensus or not. A check of the history will also illustrate that the "custom" style was implemented per Talk:London discussions and has subsequently been altered without consensus. While edits are fine, I deemed changing changing back to infobox class was clearly not okay as consensus was reached on the basis of not using infobox class for the reasons I stated in my edit summary. Before reverting pages, I ask that you bear in mind that things may not seem as apparent as they look. DJR (T) (WC) 11:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of warning

Seeing as all editors can warn, I would think it would be prudent of you to let a third party decide that. I would keep it there, and rather discuss it below the warning, and perhaps get an admin to look at it. Havok (T/C/c) 16:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will let you decide if you want to add it again or not. I have left a message on the talk page of MatthewFenton about this. Havok (T/C/c) 16:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Making a patronising an absurd claim of vandalism is essentially a personal attack. ed g2s • talk 16:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have warned them about it being uncivil. But they are entitled to warn you if they feel you are infact vandalizing articles. I'm not here to judge you if you are or not, I'm only saying that you should leave it and get someone to look at it. If they are doing it to defame you in any way, they will be warned for it. Take what I say as you please, I'm only trying to be neutral here and to help both you and MatthewFenton. Havok (T/C/c) 16:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

I've read what i need to read, and from what i have read everything is fine it qualifies as fair use and thus is a'o.k, Wikipedia is not a place for you to dictate what you think is right for fair use. Matthew Fenton [t/c] 16:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar!

For the amazing Template:Football kit, I award you this barnstar! smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 17:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. ed g2s • talk 18:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use in video game characters

Could I ask you to assist in the removal of excessive fair use imagery in the Computer and video game space pertaining to video game characters? These are usually a violation of WP:FUC #8 where a character is often illustrated beyond what is necessary in different outfits and poses. However, a small number of editors are actively monitoring these articles and will often revert any valid fair use removals.

If you're interested, you can use these templates for quicker access and a complete overview: {{Megamanzero}}, {{Tekken series}}, {{King of Fighters Characters}}, {{megamanclassic}}.

Cheers. Vic Viper 13:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Victoria Island

Please take a look at this edit. Not sure why that happened. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. ed g2s • talk 13:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: IfD

Images listed for deletion:

Matthew Fenton (contribs) 21:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Above notices compacted ed g2s • talk 00:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

rv of Copyvio

Hi, Ed_g2s. I noticed you replaced the {{imagevio}} tag I've put on Image:Lauren Woodland.jpg for a {{no license}} tag. Why was that so? Besides, thanks/congrats for your vigilant work on images. --Abu Badali 04:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was incorrectly tagged with "promophoto". The no license tag means it can be speedy deleted in 7 days. ed g2s • talk 13:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe copyvios are to be resolved in 7 days as well. Actually, the image does have a source, the point is that it's unusable :) . But as long as the image is removed from Wikipedia, it's ok. Keep on the good work. --Abu Badali 13:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it has a source, but it's not a promo photo, hence "no license". ed g2s • talk 16:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. {{no license}} and {{imagevio}} are pretty much the same, so. I couldn't see that. Thanks. Best regards, --Abu Badali 18:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hidden messages

Hi, I like the CSS formatting, but I'm not very good with it. Can you get the new template to look like the old one? In particular:

Small font size (takes up less space)
Narrower margins (ditto)
Picture and title bar fit to box width (looks nice)

Thanks, Λυδ α cιτγ 05:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It still looks rather ugly to me, but it'll do. Thanks.

Just out of curiousity, what's the need for CSS? Λυδ α cιτγ 04:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ukraine PD

That would be the following.. (d) State symbols of Ukraine, government awards; symbols and signs of government authorities, the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations; symbols of territorial communities; symbols and signs of enterprises, institutions and organizations --Palffy 20:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Use Removal

Hey. I don't know if you use some sort of script or bot for this, but the edits tend to corrupt Japanese (and possibly other) alphabets. See [1] for example, where 特撮 (Kanji) has become ?? (Question Marks). smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 20:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Album

Could you take a look at this, please? Thanks in advance. Jogers (talk) 08:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]