User talk:Skier Dude/archive/archive Feb 11

Re: 1988 Roland Gibeault major whistleblower list

Hi Skier Dude, I am sorry for the over referencing and some statements included in the List of whistleblowers. As far as Ramsey Clarks Section I did not create that and only saw it by browsing through Wikipedia that it was there and empty and that I had the digital file for that section and just wanted to help. I'm humbly requesting that you and all the other Administrators and Editors at Wikipedia to allow the 1988 Roland Gibeault be allowed back onto the major list of whistleblowers as you all see fit and I promise not to add to or take away anything from that listing. Skier Dude this is a very important historical case to the False Claims Act and to the brave whistleblowers that come forward to tell the truth and was an important case. I may have gotten carried away with all the reference material and some of the statements at the end but truly wanted the folks at Wikipedia to see the validity to this name on the list. I'm sorry if I stepped on any toes or may have angered anyone at Wikipedia or anywhere else but what was posted was the truth backed up by thousands of court documents and newspaper articles along with many credible news shows. I am truly sorry for any misunderstanding and am humbled by the deletion of a very important piece of whistleblower history and will comply to any and all of what Wikipedia see fit to restore that piece of history back onto the list. I humbly and respectfully apologize to all at Wikipedia for any mistakes I may have made to lessen Wikipedias credibility as a world wide source for good reliable information and look forward to getting my butt chewed off for my errors regarding this issue. Please reconsider and pass this along to any and all the folks at Wikipedia.Qui Tam Relator (talk) 17:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

cut & paste response all over - see the replies on your talk page. Skier Dude (talk) 22:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mainland Coat of Arms.jpg

Thank you for noticing that File:Mainland Coat of Arms.jpg was orphaned. However, I would like to point out a flaw in "the system", as it were, that led you to nominate it for CSD. The image was orphaned because of vandalism yesterday. I'm not always active on Wikipedia, and had I gone inactive, or been logged out, the image might've been deleted (since the vandalism lasted 15 hours unnoticed, who knows how long it would have gone). This isn't the first time this has occurred to me either (previously at File:Best that i could do.JPG). It would really help if it is determined why an image is orphaned, before simply having it deleted. Not trying to get on your case, it just seems like this is a recurring issue that shouldn't come up, you know? I noticed you are using Twinkle (I've used it in the past, as well as AWB), and such automation tools often make it really easy to want to avoid checking incidents out. At this point it's 1:00 AM, I'm sorta rambling, and I hope I got my point across, that I'm not mad or getting on to you, just making a suggestion. Cheers! --Vox Rationis (Talk | contribs) 06:10, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roland Gibeault

Hey Skier Dude, There is something I need you to do without making a decesion first. I believe there has been some poor research done here regarging Roland Gibeault nomination for the whistleblower list. To see the references need before making you decesion go to google and type rolandgibeault no spaces just like that and go to that site and read "Seattlement Agreement" and watch the 60 minutes segment and Gran Perrys piece on CNN with lou Dobbs on youtube under Roland Gibeault or Inge Maudal, Thank you for your ear and your paitenceQui Tam Relator (talk) 00:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus

A book cover image File:ISBN 9780712309530.jpg that I nominated for deletion here as failing WP:NFCC#8 was closed as no consensus. I would like someone else knowledgeable in such non-free images to provide me with their input before proceeding to either, renominate, or send to non-free review. Long time no hear but I am happy to see you are pretty active again. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 04:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hammersoft commented on the same question I asked him here. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 17:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting pages

Hey I'm new here, can you please tell me how to protect pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rihazrihazrihaz (talk • contribs) 13:27, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ALl page protections are done by Administrators - anyone can request a page be protected at Requests for page protection. Skier Dude (talk) 04:23, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks!

not cricket

Hi Skier Dude,

SkiersBot dropped by Talk:Medicine Hat High School and added the following correct code:

{{WikiProject Canada|ab=yes|class=stub|importance= }}

Unfortunately, it also added the following box:

This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class because it uses a sub-category of Category:Cricket stubs on the article page.

If you agree with this assessment, please remove this message.
If you disagree with this assessment, please:

Change the above "class=stub" to "class=start" or another applicable class per Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Assessment#Quality scale;
Remove the stub template from the article.

Now, Medicine Hat High School is known for many things, but not cricket! :)

I suggest Category:Cricket stubs be changed to Category:Alberta stubs in this edit, and 375 other edits related to Alberta stubs.

http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&dir=prev&offset=20110122044333&limit=375&target=SkiersBot

--Kevinkor2 (talk) 12:58, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done - for all of Canada! A true D'oh moment on my part :( 02:50, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yay! That did it. SkiersBot fixed Talk:Medicine Hat High School, and I've also looked at another couple of random diffs and found correct fixes as well. :) --Kevinkor2 (talk) 12:27, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

your renames

Thank you for tackling these, but... please stop interpreting Scouting rename requests-these are done specifically for consistency in naming and it's a waste of time to have them renamed twice. Just please do them as we ask for them. Thanks.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 03:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:FarmersFieldLayout.PNG

If what I put in isn't a fair-use rationale, then what is? Tom Danson (talk) 03:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stadium photos uploaded by User:Jordanson and User:LoVeCa

Most if not all photos uploaded by them seems to be copyright violations. Photos has got diferent sizes and were taken by different cameras. Besides these users has got huge amount of photos already deleted because of copyright violations [1], [2].--Oleola (talk) 16:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:LoVeCa - the stadium photos appear to be from different cameras or have no metadata... I tried a tineye search on a couple random ones and didn't come up with anything.

User:Jordanson - the suspicious ones are the no-metadata on-field pics, but again, i didn't see any duplicates out there. If you've got additional info on where these pics might be coming from, drop a note at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations . THanks! Skier Dude (talk) 04:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just found a source of another two: File:Stadium ogosta.jpg and File:Ogosta Stadium.jpg--Oleola (talk) 04:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And another File:Hadzhi Dimitar Stadium.jpg--Oleola (talk) 05:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Staedtler logo

Hi, Skier Dude2. I have been uploading many non-free logos before and I never had a problem, so I was surprised with your message and need to be cleared in some issues. What I wanted to do when I uploaded the logo was to replace the current File:Staedtler_Logo.svg for another one with transparent background as it is recommended by Wikipedia itself.

The point is, the logo already exists on WP so I just uploaded another version to be displayed on the Staedtler page's Infobox. So I think that the copyright that applies to both images is exactly the same, isn´t it?

Please tell me if I am allowed to do that. What you can clear me would be helpful when I have to upload other images in the future. Thanks, Fma12 (talk) 13:41, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Staedtler logo.png isn't in use, while the file File:Staedtler_Logo.svg is still in use on the article. If you're intention was to replace the .svg version, all you need to do is replace the .svg version on the article page Staedtler and then remove the "orphaned" tag from the .png version. The issue is the use of the images, non-free images that aren't used are 'deleted'. Hope this helps - if you need help with the replacement, just drop me a line. Skier Dude (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you say, my intention was to replace the svg version and then to remove the tag. Your explanation was really helpful, thanks for your support. Fma12 (talk) 04:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hristo Botev Stadium in Blagoevgrad.JPG

I found an article[3] from 25 June 2009 says that this file is taken from website [4], put copyvio template but some admin turn it down. File is currenty unavailable on Clubs.bul-foot.org because they upadated this stadium photos. But if you enter current photos[5] you will see that the default resolution of images on this website(for other stadiums too) is 720 × 540 pixels. And photo uploaded by User:LoVeCa is of course 720 × 540 pixels. So for me it's clear thats it's not his photo and he took it from this website. What do you think?--Oleola (talk) 00:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep - the 2007 date on the original was pretty much a giveaway. Skier Dude (talk) 03:00, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lokomotiv Mezdra Stadium.JPG and File:Chavdar Cvetkov Stadium.jpg are also 720 × 540 pixels so they seems to be taken from this website as well.--Oleola (talk) 02:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1 was also at Novsport - I couldn't find #2, so IfD'd it. Skier Dude (talk) 02:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found File:Mushi.jpg on [6] with the signature that photo is made by: Angel Kalinov, put copyvio template, but the same admin turn it down as before. So I'm writing again to you, because you know the situation with User:Jordanson uploads.--Oleola (talk) 23:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Skier and a situation from and old Wikeditor

Hey I'm back .. and I'm sorry to see Dr. Blofeld has retired (well he'll be back, just like I am) ...please check this site (re Ralph Garman)... I maybe be wrong with some of my edits, if so let me know ... also, check out my talk page, I was told to "Just fucking leave it alone" Be well -- Luigi... Luigibob (talk) 04:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Protection from vandalism

Hi Skier Dude, I have a big request if you can do. Can you protect Happy Feet 2 article from anonymous users, because there is a lot of excessive vandalism, and I have previously tried to stop it somehow but it is impossible. If you don't believe me please go there and see it by yourself, and then protect it. Thank you. InfamousPrince 10:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted image: caricature of Dirk Fischer

Last week, I asked the owner and creator – Valentine Garcia of Lake Elizabeth, California http://www.drawdude.com/ – of the 2005 caricature – Dirk_Fischer_Caricature.jpg – to again grant the image for (i) use on wikipedia and (ii) use in the public domain. His initial permission – given 30 Oct 2009 via email copied to wikipedia – was clear; but, apparently not good enough for wikipedia. In 2009, I asked him if he would donate it to wikipedia for use in the public domain, and he simply responded, "It's all yours." That wording is in the chain that generated Permission Ticket #2009103010052067. In that same chain, he requested that attribution be made to http://www.drawdude.com

In any event, when I get the another permission from Mr. Garcia, is it possible to resurrect the deleted file? Eurodog 03:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

RE: File:Dance of the Deadly Dinosaurs book cover.png

I am currently making a page that will be using it, by am currently working on that page before I release it to mainspace.

--NinjaTazzyDevil ^(Talk) 07:43, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:GateIn Portal

I thought that creating a talk page with no corresponding article was the way to discuss creating a new article, but obviously I was wrong. Please restore this page to my user space. I need the information in the deleted talk page in order to build the article. Obankston (talk) 04:58, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Obankston (talk) 18:58, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Consilium logo.svg

You deleted File:Consilium logo.svg giving reason: Media file available on Commons. But there is no such a file on Commons. WTM (talk) 11:01, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm showing the duplicate at File:Council of the EU logo.svg Skier Dude (talk) 03:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Virginia Tech uniforms

Thanks for the heads up. It seems some anonymous users thought it would be a good idea to remove a perfectly valid section of the VT football article and thus a couple of my images became unused. Vandals never make much sense, do they? --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 04:43, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Orphaned non-free images File:Riscos rool logo cog riscosopenltd.svg and File:Riscos rool logo cog svgedit fitcanvastocontent.svg

Hello, Skier Dude. You have new messages at Trevj's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RE: Orphaned non-free image File:Algerian Olympic Committee logo.png

Hello dear, thank u for your message and thank u for deleting the file. Effectively you are right to delete this file and that what i wanted to do, because i had created another file wich is use in articles. Till now i don't delete file wich is not use in some articles but i will do that if it's necessary on futur. Greetings. --Faycal.09 (talk) 14:30, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lincoln Laboratory

Reply to: User_talk:Nasa-verve#Orphaned_non-free_image_File:Lincoln_Lab_Logo.gif

This image is used here: Lincoln Laboratory

Nasa-verve (talk) 23:48, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of image for Eugenia Filotti Atanasiu

The article presenting this artist has been deleted. She may not be the greatest artist in the world, however her paintings are presented in various art museums in Romania, which would justify her inclusion in Wikipedia, as some people who see the paintings might want to see something about the painter. The deletion is the consequence of act of vandalism by a small group of people who have targeted articles I have created. If you want to support these vandals, be my guest. Unfortunately I have found out that there is no objectivity in en:wikipedia and that it is simply used by some unscrupulous contributors as a channel for imposing their negative views.

I have several thousands of contributions to wikipedia. But this has definitely gone too far and I will probably have to decide if I should or not continue to contribute. As an administrator maybe you will be able to induce more objectivity in how the problems of personal attacks are handled, though in this case it is probably too late. Afil (talk) 01:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of images

from the page Thirunalloor Karunakaran is nothing but vandalism. Against the Wiki spirit. Should have been civilised enough to discuss the problem.Pl.restore the images.Kkutty (talk) 08:30, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

why did you delete my page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Someoneintwocities (talk • contribs) 06:16, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hole in the Wall (UK game show) logo.png

You deleted the above file as a duplicate of File:Hole in the Wall PL.png, however they have different source attribution. The former was uploaded by myself before the latter, so the PL version is a copy of the first. However I haven't been able to check that the Polish show uses the same titles and that this is a shot from the Polish version (but given the files are bit-for-bit duplicates I doubt). Would you have an objection to me restoring File:Hole in the Wall (UK game show) logo.png and tagging the PL version appropriately? (The file was removed from Hole in the Wall (UK game show) after an IP amended the filename and it was subsequently removed as a redlink. I plan to restore it to the article.) matt br 23:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done - but there shouldn't be two identical images here - if the other is "later", let me know & I'll consolidate them. Skier Dude (talk) 23:22, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sallie Bingham photo

Dear Skier Dude,

We appreciate your interest in this page, but don't understand why the photo was deleted. Sallie Bingham, the photographer, and I (one of Sallie's editors) all wanted it up on her page, and I believe the permission was in order.

Sincerely, Eye Tooth — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eye Tooth (talk • contribs) 21:40, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of images Stef Broks.jpg, Daniel de Jongh.jpg, Jochemjacobsindia.jpg, Textures live in Delhi.jpg

Hi,

You have deleted these images for lack of evidence of permission, but I have confirmed with the photographers that they have sent an e-mail to permissions-en@wikimedia.org accepting to release the images under the cc-by-sa 3.0 license. Please look into it and restore the deleted images ASAP.

Thanks.

Kartikdhar (talk) 12:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted image

Hi Skier Dude,

I am wondering why you have deleted the image of the Embassy which was uploaded to the page in all langage versions (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Embassy_of_Canada_to_Poland, http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambassade_du_Canada_en_Pologne, http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambasada_Kanady_w_Polsce)? The file name was Canadian Embassy in Warsaw by Daniel Stepien.jpg

The author of the image gave his permission to put it on the above pages.

I would be grateful some clarification and information if you can please restore the image.

Thank you and kind regards, Wsaw-td2 (talk) 15:11, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to the notification here which points to the discussion at Wiki Commons. All claims of "I have permission" or "the author gave permission" must be confirmed by the author (not you) through the WP:OTRS system. P.S. If you are editing from two accounts User:Wsaw-td2 and User:WSAW you should mark one as closed and use solely the other (concerns about WP:Sockpuppetry could be raised). Skier Dude (talk) 01:57, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

question

I am working on the Food Policy article for a school project and had added a picture. I was wondering the reasoning behind removing it. If it doesn't fit for it what is a suggestion for a picture to add to the article? Thank you! Kimberly wymer (talk) 21:26, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposals for deletion

We had a short exchange of notes regarding the proposals for deletion of articles which I wrote. I would kindly draw your attention on the proposal regardin the Filotti family article. Do you not find it strange that the same person is consistently involved in those proposals or in supporting them.

I do not want to put up a fight, but I consider that this type of dispute should end. I am not new to Wikipedia and am perfectly aware of when such proposals are mode in total bad faith. I would request your advice on how to proceed. Maybe an arbitration would be a solution, but I would prefer to solve the conflict in a civilized manner.Afil (talk) 03:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have made a note on the AFD article, which would have been my first suggestion. Going to 'official channels' - a good place to start is at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts - you'll need to show some proof of this; "wikistalking" (in the negative sense) can be dealt with there. Skier Dude (talk) 03:25, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Donna Jackson Image

I happened to be on Frickative's page and found the source of the orphaned image note you left. Someone removed the image from the Donna Jackson article and replaced it with another (if not for the other it would have been an easy replacement, obviously). I'm sure the image is still useable, but I've left my research on her talk page and will let her decide since I know absolutely nothing about Holby City (other than seeing it on her userpage numerous times LMAO). =)

If you wish to comment any, do so there so we don't have two fragmented conversations. CycloneGU (talk) 07:34, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Album

Hello. I see you nominated File:Beyonce-Knowles-Work-It-Out-UKSingle.jpg for deletion. I can tell you from now, the album will not be used in the future, so if it is possible, you can delete it now thank you :] Theuhohreo (talk) 12:53, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned image

Dear Skier Dude

Thanks for the message regarding Orphaned image Joseph Brennan.

I did try to add the image to the article about Joseph Brennan but I was unsuccessful with it.I tried for many hours but could not load it into the artcle. If their was an easy step by step approach it may helf.

Wellcome your suggestions.

Kateships (talk) 16:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page stalking

Just happened to be in the area and saw your request. I don't know why you have .pdf after it, but it appears to be an image file. I have added an infobox from another article I already have loaded since there is no other image on the article, so this can be the identifying image as long as all other criteria for image inclusion are met. You may want to look up the infobnox to use and ensure the same image tag is included within that infobox, though I wonder if the image can be moved to .jpg and all that...

In any case, is this what you wanted? CycloneGU (talk) 16:44, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Qui Tam Relator

Hi Skier Dude hope all is well with you. I have been trying to contact CactusWriter or VQuakr from the hospital for a chat but maybe you can help me Skier Dude or speak with CW or VQ. I made a promise that I would not go to the List Of Whistleblowers site to edit and I'm always true to my word. I would like to add something to my name there at that site but would much rather go to you or someone who I have worked with from the beginning like CW or VQ. I would like to add a fact that is widely publicized in newspaper articles and court documents that I worked under cover for the FBI and DCIS for over 18 months and I feel that this short piece of information should be mentioned in the bio next to where my picture will be placed sometime in the future. The reason why I feel it's very important to have that bit of info there is because of all the future Whistleblowers reading this section of Wikipedia to know and understand that this is what it took to uncover the Genisco Technology & Texas Instruments fraud on the HARM missile. It's only a natter if less then a sentence to be added to get that point across for all that reads about myself and other Whistleblowers who risk their lives and livelihood to expose large frauds against the American Tsxpayers and against our military men and women. Please talk to others regarding my request and again I made a promise not to go there my self unless allowed by the administrators and editors with whom I made that deal with. Also Skier Dude my name is all over the Internet with conversations I've had with other Editors and Administrators from Wikipedia and don't wish to have my conversations published on the web and if someone could help me out getting those conversation deleted from the World Wide Web it would be greatly appreciated I didn't know that my conversation with the folks at Wikipedia would be published like that. Anyway please try and help me on the issues that I've mentioned above. Thank you for your ear and patienceQui Tam Relator (talk) 17:17, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skier Dude

Thank you very much for placing the image into the article. It looks fine.

Regards Kateship — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kateships (talk • contribs) 19:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- can you help me understand why you deleted the photo in my article?

Please explain why you deleted the photo of Nicole Verkindt in the article "Nicole Verkindt". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanessa.rena.black (talk • contribs) 20:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Butting in: Skier Dude didn't delete the image. Look at your talk page. ImageTaggingBot left a message on February 10 regarding licensing problems. You must not have paid heed to it, and after 7 days the image was deleted. Skier Dude simply went to the page and removed the reference to the missing image; he had nothing to do with removal of the image. CycloneGU (talk) 00:08, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I did the deletion of an image that did not have a source or a license: "posted freely online" is not a source - give the direct link to the original image so that the (c) attribution can be determined. Without that the appropriate (c) license tag can't be verified. If you have either of them you can make a posting at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion for the quickest response. Skier Dude (talk) 04:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again about deletions

I must apologize for disturbing you again. In a previous conversation you advised me to take my case to wikiquette, which I did. The trouble is that, while other discussions were left open, in my case User:Gerardw had twice closed the discussion, contending that it is not the right place for the discussion.

I was trying to have a discussion according to Wikipedia rules. I do not think it is right to close the discussion when there was only one wikipedian who marginally discussed the issue, and a first answer from User:Biruitorul, who said he was sticking to his guns and would continue to propose the deletion of one of my articles every week, but not looking at the other issues I had raised and the other articles I had quoted. I did not raise the problem of a specific deletion but of a series of deletion proposals regarding my articles. And specifically I have raised the question that while other articles are simply tagged for lack of notability, leaving the collectivity time to improve the article, in my case they were immediately proposed for deletion. I still do not understand the discrepancy.

May view may be wrong, but it is difficult to accept that it cannot be discussed. Especially as this is the only discussion on wikiquette which is closed because a single person thinks that it is not the right place.

I am not new to Wikipedia, I have thousands of contributions in various language Wikipedias (though most of them in en:Wiki). I also have the statute of administrator in other wikipedias so I am not a stranger to what Wikipedia is about. But this is the first case I encounter of a Wikipedian not being allowed to have an exchange of opinions on an issue he have raised.

If I do not have the right to a discussion of an issue, I still have the option to leave en:wiki. I can always try to contribute to one of the big other wikipedias (french or german). I would however be both sorry and bitter if I am pushed to this. I would kindly request that, in your capacity of admnistrator, you would look into the matter and decide if it is correct not to allow a discussion. Or if there is any other action you would recommend in this case. Afil (talk) 02:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If I may say a few words:
- Liviu Filotti has been on Wikipedia for 843 days, the other articles a similar amount of time. It's inaccurate to say they're being "immediately" tagged for deletion. Plus, once nominated, there's a window of a week to demonstrate notability.
- It's also not true that I'm ignoring what you say. For instance, I restored the redirect at Rebreanu. I also spent some time looking into Sorin Adam Matei: the man does seem marginally notable (though the article does need plenty of work), so I won't nominate for deletion, but you're free to do so.
- If you look at my AfD activity, you'll see that, while I've nominated several articles by you, I've also nominated others. This is not, and never was, about singling you out. It simply appears to me that a number of your articles do not meet the notability threshold, and I want discussions to determine that. Nothing illegitimate or untoward about that, is there? - Biruitorul ^Talk 03:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I'm reading the WP:WQA the base issue of wikistalking by Biruitorul wasn't substantiated. In fact, there appear to have been several improvement (major /minor) made to articles that you've started. I reviewed the closing of four discussions Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ion Filotti Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugenia Filotti Atanasiu Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victor Filotti Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ligia Filotti and all seem to have been closed correctly. If you wish, you can present them to WP:Deletion review, but without addressing the issues that led to the deletion beforehand (and please see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists regarding the arguments to avoid in that process), that's a relatively difficult process. I'm at a loss of any other venue that would be appropriate except deletion review. Skier Dude (talk) 04:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture Question

Hi. I was just curious. I wanted to post this picture here on an article. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OGVS1BCBX98/TDSY6t1thlI/AAAAAAAAArU/ThIRaBT_dPw/s1600/frank1.jpg

The picture (from the proposed film King Kong vs Frankenstein)was first published in the book Willis O'Brien Special Effects Genius by Steve Archer. The photos were supplied by O'Brien's widow Darlyene (who has since passed away). Is it possible that I can post the pic on an article or does it violate some policy or guideline? The pic has appeared on various websites on the net as well through the years.Giantdevilfish (talk) 04:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) This appears to be the same image you discussed with me some months ago, now archived as User talk:Ww2censor/Archive21#Picture Question and the image link you provided at that time can be found here on archive.org but I don't see that you have found any new copyright information that would now show this to be a freely licenced image. ww2censor (talk) 04:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bloodbeasts

File:Bloodbeasts.jpg is once again in use at Beauty and the Beast (2003 film). I'm not sure why the picture was removed. Looked like someone was trying to make a good faith edit and removed it. I'm pretty sure it is still acceptable use on Wikipedia, is it? -WarthogDemon 06:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Dr Robert Laws 1930.jpg

Dear Skier Dude,

Thank you for your comments. The photo in question (taken in 1930) is out of copyright. However it may be owned by Edinburgh University - they are not sure of this (it is in their archives) but have given me permission to use it for my Wikipedia article - I have asked them to confirm this in writing. When I get this I will amend the tags (is there anything else to do??) The photo is orphaned as I am preparing an article on Dr. Laws on my own page Jdu46. Is it possible, for the moment, to upload the photo only to Jdu46? At some point I will want to move my article from Jdu46 to the accessible online main site. At present I don't know how to do this. Any tips or directions?? Thanks, Jdu46 Jdu46 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

No, but you can link to it by pasting [[:Image:Dr Robert Laws 1930.jpg]] to where you plan to have the image. The deletion tag will only be removed when the image is in the article space. mechamind 9 0 18:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem becomes that it will not be in the article space while he is working on the article in his userspace. The only way to ensure it's in the article space is to actually work on the article at its intended location by moving it there, or leave it for now and reupload once he received the permission and is ready to put the image in place. CycloneGU (talk) 19:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images (with rare exception) are not deleted from the servers - if and when the article is moved into the mainspace, you can request here or at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion (quicker response there :) and the image can be restored and placed on the article. Skier Dude (talk) 04:48, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Skier Dude,

Please justify the reason for removal of smktk.jpg.

It is a school badge that was around since c1970 and with that, it is well supposed to be in public domainbut with restricted usage to prevent vandalism and undue representation.

Thank you, seventwentyone — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seventwentyone (talk • contribs) 05:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]