Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:04, 8 January 2007

Archives
User talk:Zscout370/Archive 1 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 2 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 3 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 4 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 5 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 6

Hellenic Air Force Roundel.svg

Hi, could you upload this image to Misplaced Pages Commons please? Zz99 12:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Give me several hours; I'm at a place where the Internet connection is spotty, at best. User:Zscout370 13:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to trouble you. I found another variant on commons - "Grecja-roundel.svg". However I would like to ask you for Roundel of the Philippines Air Force.svg instead, if thats ok Zz99 13:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I can still upload both, I just need to get somewhere that I can get a better internet connection. Misplaced Pages doesn't load for me half of the time. User:Zscout370 13:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! No hurry. Zz99 14:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I uploaded the second photo. I am still debating about the Greece roundel image. User:Zscout370 01:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for uploading it! Zz99 12:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you pls help

Can you look into this link below (as you've already had an idea about the issue) and help resolve it? Thanks ­ Kris (talk) 18:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive68#User_reverting_image_copyvio.2Fno-source_tags

I am going to get some more eyeballs to look at this, because it seems that what I am doing in ineffective. User:Zscout370 18:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

About your deletion of Image:Hussein hangs.jpg

The reason for deletion was: "blatent copyright violation from http://news.yahoo.com/photo/061230/ids_photos_wl/r2543073752.jpg", however I wonder why this image does not falls under fair use criteria of a not replaceable TV screenshot of a significant historical event? --WinHunter 23:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The image came from Reuters, who forbids commercial use of their images. Plus since the image came out less than 3 days ago, the agency, among others, are selling the photograph to other agencies. By us having it, we will fail in the 4th requirement for the image to be fair use. User:Zscout370 23:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I have to say that first of all Reuters does not own copyright because it's a screenshot from the iraqi tv, so the iraqi station own the copyright, thought that's irrelevant at this point because the image is used under fair use, which "permit the use of copyrighted material on Misplaced Pages under a restricted set of criteria" when the content is not freely available. An example to this use of copyrighted material is Image:New York Times 9-11.jpg, which shows the newspaper headline (copyrighted content) of a important historic event under fair use. --WinHunter 04:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

When I checked the image, it was being sold by Iraq TV to Reuters and the AP, and all three well selling the image. We still cannot use it yet. They are still selling the image. Give it about 6 months and I will have no objections. User:Zscout370 06:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Another hint, someone uploaded a copy of the photo to the Wikimedia Commons. We cannot host fair use on the Commons at all, so even if down the road that we can use the Saddam hanging photo, we cannot have it on the Commons. What will most likely happen is after a few weeks, when the newsworthyness of the photo is gone, I will restore it. It has the source info, we have image undeletion, so give me about 5 weeks and I will restore it. Agreed? User:Zscout370 06:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure, that's fine with me. --WinHunter 11:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Lupang Hinirang

I 4got to check with you if you got the wma file. --Pinay (talk•email) 00:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Just caught me eating dinner, so I will check in a few minutes. User:Zscout370 00:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

O, I thought of it being sent last Friday. No? maybe today, if Nox gets the chance to go on-line. First day back to work after the holidays...--Pinay (talk•email) 01:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope, didn't get it yet. User:Zscout370 01:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey. Forwarded Nox email to you just now. Pls check and msg me when you get it. Thanks. --Pinay (talk•email) 00:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Please speedily undelete my user-subpage

Please immediately undelete my user-subpage User:Rwendland/Image:Hussein hangs.jpg that you "out of process" speedily deleted at 03:44 this morning . I can see no proper basis for you deleting my user-subpage; it did not contain the image in question and was simply a record of the copyright justification prior to deletion so I could sleep on the matter before deciding if I wanted to take the issue further. The process for requesting a user page deletion is described at Misplaced Pages:User_page#Removal. Rwendland 18:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Restored, sorry about that. User:Zscout370 21:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Good. Do you also accept that as File:Hussein hangs.jpg had both a fair-use template and a Fair Use Rationale section, and that User:Rory096 had commenced the IfD process, you were wrong to speedily delete that image, and the proper thing to do would have been to let the IfD process run? (I do have sympathy with your argument that Reuters could be marketing the image so fair-use was invalid - but that argument should have been made in the IfD discussion.) I struggle to think of a reason for you to delete my user-subpage other than to remove evidence regarding your speedy delete of File:Hussein hangs.jpg - please explain. Rwendland 09:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Tambayan Philippines

Err.. why are you reverting edits by User:Of? It looks like he's just archiving old discussions to Misplaced Pages talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive07. TheCoffee 04:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I see it now, it would be helpful that he is saying "I am archiving this" instead of just blanking the page without any comment. User:Zscout370 04:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Alright, thanks... TheCoffee 04:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I also replied to OF's email, so he should be unblocked by now. User:Zscout370 04:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

What is your reason and authority for indefinitely blocking User:Nkras?

i see no discussion of this at ArbCom or ANI or anywhere. what gives you that authority? there is something very sinister going on here and ArcCom will be hearing about it soon. r b-j 05:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The administrators have the ability to block people for any length of time. Your friend, Nkras, was reposting content that was previously deleted under our policies. After being told not told, he did so anyways and promised to keep doing it. Because of his intent to disrupt Misplaced Pages, I had no choice to block him indefinitely. Plus, indefinite blocks do not have to first discussed on ANI or ArbCom. User:Zscout370 05:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

he is not my friend even though he "thanked" me for comments i put on his talk page and i agree with him only marginally (almost not at all) on content regarding the article Marriage. i cannot find any discussion of the degree of abuse except on his talk page and that is thin. i dunno where you come from but this indefinite block is playing right into the hands of his content opponents and this is, in effect, a block because of content dispute.

i am no neophyte here, and unless you do the right thing here, Fred Bauder and other ArbCommissioners are going to hear about this. this is systemic bias at it's ugliest. r b-j 05:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I am inclined not to lift the block. He was warned plenty of times. Also, read my comment in the next section about the details of the block. User:Zscout370 06:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Nkras' block

Although theatrical language like "something sinister going on" is of course out of place, I also support a review of the indefinite block on User:Nkras. After his initial clumsy behavior at Talk:Marriage, he de-escalated the situation himself and participated in the successful, collegial revision of the article's opening. I believe the attempted recreation of Traditional marriage was also in good faith, as this was discussed during the afd.

DanB†DanD 05:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that he was asked to not do it, yet he still did. The one that caused the indefinite block was the following message when he decided to recreate the article at Marriage (traditional): "18:42, 3 January 2007 . . Nkras (Talk | contribs | block) (Creation of Marriage (traditional). Deletion of this article without discussion, even by Admins, will be considered prima facie POV.)" If something was deleted because of AFD, then he should have gone to Misplaced Pages:Deletion review, not recreate the article across Misplaced Pages under several names. User:Zscout370 05:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

and he'll learn. a 24 or 48 hour block might have sent a message, but the indefinite block says that "Nkras cannot get the message so why try?" the indefiniteness of the block is disproportionate and just wrong. i'm too tired to file a RFA now (01:13 hours EST), but i hope you will save us all a lot of time and headache and fix this before i get the energy to act on this. r b-j 06:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

As I said above, I am not going to lift the block. User:Zscout370 06:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I was also someone on the opposite side of the fence from Nkras on most issues, but I still am shocked that he was blocked indefinitely, and think it was a gross overreaction. I would hope that this decision will be reversed, as Nkras, while being somewhat problematic at the beginning of his editing here, was a major force in resolving the conflict on the Marriage article. If he is unblocked, I will be the first to welcome him back. We had strong differences of opinion, but he certainly had my respect for his ability to compromise in order to achieve consensus. Jeffpw 09:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• I further think that protecting the Tradiditonal Marriage pages is heavy handed, to say the least. Several people, myself included, said that the topic itself was certainly worthy of an article, just not the article that was copied from Marriage itself. Now anyone who wants to write about the development of the term as used for political purposes is blocked from writing it. Jeffpw 09:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I had no hand in the protection, that would have to be discussed with the protecting admin, who is on vacation. User:Zscout370 21:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, you have made your position clear about your block of Nikras, so I shall, as well. I find it to be heavy handed, and entirely disproportionate to his transgression. I further find it troubling that you and other admins block users without explaining to them (many of whom are new or relatively new) what their options are in the situation. I once again request you unblock him. I also plan on submitting this to WP:AN and WP:ANI. Jeffpw 21:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I won't unblock. The only options that this user really has is to convince me that he needs an unblock. He can do that via email, which is listed at my userpage on MetaWiki (see the link on my userpage). Other than that, his options are slim. User:Zscout370 22:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

One more thing, he can still post at his talk page. User:Zscout370 22:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Execution of Saddam

http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/01/01/wld02.asp hi Saddam died at 6:10, this guy kept on reverting and making things wrong... Iraq official death certificate is 6:10, died 6:05... http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/01/01/wld02.asp . Also that guy removed saddam's link to his last hours, all those should go back. en.wikipedia.org/Saddam_hussein You should block this guy who kept on reversing everything. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Execution_of_Saddam_Hussein&diff=98515213&oldid=98514518 is best version, see what can be done asap. you can go on talk page yourself and waste time.

I am not going get involved with that. Take your battle elsewhere. User:Zscout370 23:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

So who the h... made you administrator, you seem a hypocrite, you just did something over there with some page photo.

All I did was I removed the photos from the articles for being copyright violations. I have no interest in finding out what time did he die. There is a post at WP:AN and on the talk page of Saddam's article. There is nothing much I can add and I won't be any use at those pages. User:Zscout370 23:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Immaculate Heart of Mary Seminary

Zach, please check if the stub can now be removed from the article. Also, the source for the IHMS song is already in the file. Please check so we can make the necessary correction. (BTW, let me know if you got the email re Lupang Hinirang). --Pinay (talk•email) 01:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Removing stub tags now. Email received. User:Zscout370 02:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

As for the song of the IHMS, was it emailed to you guys or did you download it somewhere? Regardless, list it on the page of the file. User:Zscout370 03:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The composer, Fr. Roland Pacudan, also posted it here Pls check if that is okey.--Pinay (talk•email) 04:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Re the Lupang Hinirang, I just listened to the wma file now, I did not know it was so "scratchy" or noisy. Why? old age? LoL! You've managed to lessen the noise? Is it better? --Pinay (talk•email) 04:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Arbeit Macht Frei, offensive imagery: User:EvilAlex

This image is deeply offensive to me and to many others. The persistent upload and re-creation of this image, now under a new name, has been done to circumvent a prevented protection and block of same. It is now renamed "Welcome3.gif" I have already told the author that I find it deeply offensive. He has also been warned by a total of 3 admins so far. He has been told that if he keeps uploading it, he will be blocked without further warning. The warning was: "If you do one more such edit you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages." I ask that you please block him now and please delete this image for the last and final time. He has been given a lot of warnings and the image has been deleted many times before, but he keeps flouting the rules. - Mauco 03:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Blocked for 48 hours. User:Zscout370 04:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

request for arbitration.

arbitration has been requested for a dispute that you are or may be involved in. please see Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#User:Nkras indefinitely blocked by admin User:Zscout370 r b-j 04:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

About your removal of the fair use photo on Execution of Saddam Hussein

You deleted the image, but to me it seems like a fair use image according to WP:FAIR, under the overview of

• "critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." - Yeah, it does that.
• the execution is as notorious the "Muhammad cartoons newspaper scan", being the subject of worldwide discussion. Basically, it's not replacable with a free alternative and contains analysis and commentary.

It also fits the policy as:

• No free equivilent exists
• Won't replace the original market, since it's only a screenshot
• It was low-resolution
• It has been previously published
• It is encyclopaedic
• Meets the media-specific requirements
• Was used in an article
• Contributes significantly to the article (adds /A LOT/ to it)
• Used in article namespace
• Contained proper attribution

If you disagree (which I have a feeling you might), could you advise as to where to go to get a second opinion? I think it's an iconic, important, informative image that should to be placed on the page -Halo 08:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The reason why I deleted the image is that the image is fairly recent and is being sold by Iraq TV, Reuters and the AP. Under the fair use laws of the US, we cannot have the photo yet because the news agencies are still selling the photo. We are hurting the market value of the photo and we cannot host it because of it. As I told others, give us about 4 weeks and I can have the original Saddam hanging video restored. User:Zscout370 11:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Whaaaaaaaaaaat??!!

You have more than 20,000 edits. =D Nothing I was just aghast. =)) Berserkerz Crit 10:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Week

The best existing proposal I can, in my own limited way, think of for the previously discussed "appreciation week" can now be found at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week#Misplaced Pages Week. Any comments or responses would be more than welcome. Badbilltucker 15:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Paring Bol-anon

Hi! I placed the template US interactive map on the Paring Bol-anon USA section. Will you please check if that is all right and/or move to a best position? Thank you...--Pinay (talk•email) 22:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The location is fine. I am going to email you the OGG file we discussed earlier now. User:Zscout370 22:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Got the email! BTW, What is the best player to play ogg? --Pinay (talk•email) 23:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I use Winamp (to get the OGG codec version, you need to go to the Winamp website and click the player to download. Click "get basic" then click "full." User:Zscout370 23:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Will do...--Pinay (talk•email) 00:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Download successfully done! Thank you for the step-by-step process. I am using it now. --Pinay (talk•email) 02:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Saddam timing is important, what do you mean by immaculate heart of mary?Is that part of rosary?

Er, what is this about? the seminary?--Pinay (talk•email) 00:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Pinay, ignore the last banter. User:Zscout370 01:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI

Just wondering if you've read this.--Pinay (talk•email) 06:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

O, and this is a version of the UP Concert Chorus. --Pinay (talk•email) 06:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

As for the blog, yes I read it before. I left comments on it before. I seen the soundclick page before, but haven't gotten anything from them yet. User:Zscout370 20:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

seals

Hi! when you get slack time, do you think you can improve the seals of the Diocese of Tagbilaran and the Diocese of Talibon? Let me know...Thanks. --Pinay (talk•email) 18:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Nkras

Just letting you know that I decided to try unblocking him. See User talk:Nkras. Basically I feel that, it's worth given him a second chance. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fine. I will keep watch, but won't do any more blockings. I still believe that my original blocking should be a wake-up call for Nkras and that he knows that he has the community watching him. User:Zscout370 01:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Images with permission

"these images are speedy deleted by order of Jimbo Wales since May of 2005"

Can you provide a pointer to this order and the rationale for it? If we have permission to use an image, we can use the image. Seems pretty clear to me. — Omegatron 04:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The Order can be read at (which is linked on my userpage too). I do not know why he personally did this decision, I cannot peer into his mind and find out why. What I, and Jimbo, meant by "by permission only" images is that Misplaced Pages, and only Misplaced Pages, can use the content. Misplaced Pages's content is copied by various websites, including images. That would put mirrors into a bind, plus, if we want to make a Misplaced Pages DVD, we can't use those images. I hope this helps. User:Zscout370 10:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)