User talk:MECU/Archive/2007/December

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:World Series Logo 2005.png

Thanks for uploading Image:World Series Logo 2005.png. 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 16:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 49	3 December 2007	About the Signpost

Signpost interview: New Executive Director Sue Gardner	Arbitration Committee elections: Elections open
Possible license migration sparks debate	Featured articles director names deputy
Software bug fixed, overuse of parser function curtailed	WikiWorld comic: "Wordplay"
News and notes: Wikipedian honored, fundraiser, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: LGBT studies	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Karen Filippelli\Rashida Jones image

Could this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TheOffice_Karen.png be used 2 show Rashida Jones. I've been told that unless it's fair use indictes it can be used 2 show Rashia it cant.

It's a pic of Rashida as Karen, so I think it should be used 2 both ficitonal Karen and real Rashida.
Thx.
70.108.126.66 (talk) 02:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

No, it should only be used on the character page (or tv series article), not the actress article because that would be replaceable. MECU≈talk 13:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

This concerns you....

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Possible issue with 2007 NCAA Division I FBS football rankings and template.↔NMajdan•talk 14:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, you already know. Don't know how I missed that.↔NMajdan•talk 14:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:John Bunting-UNC.jpeg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:John Bunting-UNC.jpeg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media 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 media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media 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 media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media 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 description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. High on a tree (talk) 00:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rayearth-front-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rayearth-front-cover.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 (talk) 17:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MAN logo290306.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:MAN logo290306.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 (talk) 17:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lakers 1966-1991.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Lakers 1966-1991.png. 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 (talk) 20:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Piratelogo6067.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Piratelogo6067.gif. 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 (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Backslash

You removed the following from backslash:

For example, people might write about an "African\American ancestry". Computer-illiterate people who would once say "slash" when they meant "backslash" are now so used to being corrected that they now say "backslash" when they mean "slash," for example, when speaking a URL.

The first sentence was written by me, the second was written by someone else. You claimed the example was "offensive". Please clarify exactly what was offensive about it. Thanks. JIP | Talk 20:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe I did that as the result of an WP:OTRS ticket received, though I didn't mention that in the summary so I can't look up the number. I could search for the ticket, but I doubt that would be useful. There really isn't a need to use the example type given. There are infinite other examples available, and so that example isn't needed. I believe, and this is a guess, that the complainant was inferring that "African\American ancestry" and "Computer-illiterate people" were too close for their own good. It wasn't personal towards you at all. MECU≈talk 21:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. The "African\American" part is intended to illustrate the misplaced backslash, not African/Americans. It could just as well read "Martian\Australians". Or an almost completely culture-neutral "apples €8\kg". Would something like this be a better idea? JIP | Talk 07:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, though there may be some Martians or Australians that complain. MECU≈talk 13:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed change to {{cbb link}}

I'd like your feedback on my proposal at Template Talk:cbb link. Hoof Hearted (talk) 14:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Forgive my ignorance, but what exactly do you mean by subst'ing the template? My thought was that if the {{cbb link}} is used for an article for a particular season we should manually change

{{cbb link|year=2007-08|team=Virginia Hokies...|title=Virginia Tech}} to [[2007-08 Virginia Hokies...|Virginia Tech]]

Is there a better way to do this, or are we saying the same thing? Won't {{subst:cbb link...}} still call the ifexist function? Hoof Hearted (talk) 14:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

We're talking about the same thing. subst: will still run the functions (unfortunately) and not just replace with the season article. MECU≈talk 16:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Heisman Trophy logo

Mecu, a third user tagged the logo for its lack of rationale. I uploaded the image before we had free images of the awards themselves. The logo is no more recognizable than the statuettes themselves, and looking at the situation now, I find that I can not defend it's use. If you disagree, please add your reasons to the image's description page. Best ×Meegs 18:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I took care of things. Thank you for the heads up, I was confused as to why it was just removed, but this makes sense now. Thank you. MECU≈talk 20:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

History page question

A deletion question has been posed on the page Minnesota Golden Gophers under Jim Wacker. As someone who has worked very hard in the WikiProject College football, I would be interested in your input, as from previous discussions I have found archived, you seem to have a decent knowledge on the discussion on the subject. Thanks for you time.-Colslax (talk) 23:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Last Christmas

I would like to hear your rationale for 'keep', when the only 'keep' vote was an invocation of 'ignore all rules'.Kww (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I provided my rationale on the page. I don't think this has anything to do with IAR. MECU≈talk 15:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll buy 'no consensus'. I'll have to figure out next steps ... I don't want to be a member of the fair use gestapo, but I really don't think that fair use covers this case.Kww (talk) 16:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 50	10 December 2007	About the Signpost

Wikipedia dragged into German politics over Nazi images	Wales comments on citing Wikipedia produce BBC correction
WikiWorld comic: "Kilroy was here"	News and notes: Elections, Wikimania 2009, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Greater Manchester
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:Quest.jpg

Hello, i've seen that you have rollbacked my request of deletion of the image. Yes, it's used in Shackleton-Rowett Expedition, but only because the photo link in tha page should link to this photo that is on commons (it's a photo of the ship used during the Expedition). So at the moment the actua quest.jpg is *used* only by mistake. The problem is caused because both files are called Quest.jpg. In case you don't want to delete the file... do you know how can i solve this problem? Thanks very much, --Hal8999 (talk) 03:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You should go through WP:IFD to get the image deleted. It doesn't really meet any CSD criteria for deletion. MECU≈talk 13:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject College football December 2007 Newsletter

The December 2007 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion as I2

Just as a heads up, I reverted you on Metrorail (Washington, D.C.) and Metro Center (Washington Metro), where Twinkle commented out Image:WMATA metro center crossvault.jpg on those two articles when you (correctly) deleted the empty image page on Wikipedia as I2. Just don't forget to revert yourself on those automatic comment-outs when the image still exists on Commons. I will admit, I got in trouble on the same exact thing myself not too long ago. So just letting you know. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I thought I had caught all my errors, but thanks for catching the ones that I let fall through the crack. MECU≈talk 00:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio tag removal

Why did you remove this one? Seemed like a clear copyvio to me. Tijuana Brass (talk) 01:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Read the tag. They are claiming a free license and permission. You should use WP:PUI instead. MECU≈talk 14:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I did read the tag. Looked like a pretty dubious claim to me. Tijuana Brass (talk) 20:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

OTRS

Hey - do you still do m:OTRS emails? Can you check out User_talk:Hotcop2#Possibly_unfree_Image:LennonNYC.jpg and see if you have email(s) from him in OTRS about a couple of images he has uploaded? He says that he sent emails in November to permissions-en. The description pages have contradictory information (GFDL, {{attribution}}, and Wikipedia-only) but from what he has said, it seems like he (not the copyright holder) added the Wikipedia-only because he (not the copyright holder) didn't want the images to be moved to Commons. Can you see if there is anything in the hopper? Thanks. --B (talk) 19:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks --B (talk) 03:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Docazul.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Docazul.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rossodoc.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Rossodoc.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 51	17 December 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: ArbCom elections, holiday publication
Former Wikimedia employee's criminal history detailed	Möller resigns from board, joins foundation as employee
Google announces foray into user-generated knowledge	WikiWorld comic: "Tractor beam"
News and notes: Elections, Wikimania 2009, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Plants	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Archiemartin (talk · contribs)

Hi Mecu!

You adopted Archiemartin (talk · contribs). I'm coming to you rather than make trouble for him.

He has declared the article Suz Andreasen off-limits for other editors because it is part of his dissertation and because you have told him that, as the original author, all edits to the article must be passed by him first.

This is a depressingly minor matter, but, because this is his article, the WP:MOS doesn't apply to it as he reads it. Therefore, the article can look like an advert, with an image in the top left. As you already know, images go in the top right for accessibility reasons and to preserve the flow of the text.

I've reverted him when wikifying, then reverted his WP:OWN change. I've now been reverted again [1] and told to butt out of "his" article (citing you as someone who supports him in this). Obviously, I'm not going to edit war over this, but he needs to drop the confrontationalism at the very least!

Could you have a word? And perhaps restore the image to the right, as per the Manual of Style and every other article?

Cheers! ➔ REDVEЯS likes kittens... and you 20:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely and I fully agree with you, and doubt that I ever actually said he could own it or anything of the such. MECU≈talk 22:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd be both appalled and flabbergasted if you had! Reading back, it (now) sounds like I was accusing you. Bad Redvers! Down boy! No, I was meaning to convey what was being said, not what you actually said. Sorry. V sorry. Really got to read for that third time before hitting "save". Tsk. ➔ REDVEЯS is wearing a pointy red hat 22:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't take it that way. I think Archie probably just confused (or mis-remembers) something I said. MECU≈talk 22:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

REDVEЯS (talk · contribs)

Hi Mecu - Adopter - how are you? Well I hope:)

I have been off WP for a month as I was finishing up with dissertation.

But - to the issue you have been snagged in -

Redvers is really stretching his interpretaion of what I wrote to him. Frankly - I find his attitude insulting using ALL CAPPS and telling me to read MANUAL OF STYLE, allind BOLD'

as if I had no clue. But the point I was making to him, which has been made to me over and over regarding original postings is that the style is to be referred to by original poster. Example? When I tried to get consistency with the american term "jewelry" versus "jewellery." I lost that battle because according to WP manual of style, the original poster should be consulted.

Second - if you read over what I wrote to him - I NEVER said, it was "Off Limits" -- in fact - he has not seen quite the opposite - which is that I saw all his edits and liked them! But instead of him realizing this, he just keeps changing the layout and I do not agree with this one point.

While I will stick to the not changing again within the 3 day limit - I will go and change it back again. I thank you for having a word, as he asked you to, but really, I think he is the one who is out of line on this. I wrote it, I continue to foster it, other related categories, my Dorrie Nossiter article AND other folks who I nominated for speedy deletion for his very first original argument which was that this was too "advertising" like.

I will write to him again - but I will be frank - I won't back down on this.

I appreciate you stepping in to help, mabe you could have a word with him and explain how he misread my words? Again - If you read my correspondence - I have let others help me with this article. It is just this ONE point that I do not agree with. That is all. And - what is more Manual of Style agrees with me!

EXAMPLE --"Images

The following general guidelines should be followed in the absence of a compelling reason to do otherwise.

   * Start an article with a right-aligned image.
   * Multiple images in the same article can be staggered right-and-left (Example: Timpani).
   * Avoid sandwiching text between two images facing each other.
   * Generally, right-alignment is preferred to left- or center-alignment. (Example: Race (classification of human beings)).

o Exception: Portraits with the head looking to the reader's right should be left-aligned (looking into the text of the article) when this does not interfere with navigation or other elements. In such cases, it may be appropriate to move the Table of Contents to the right by using

. Since faces are not perfectly symmetrical, it is generally inadvisable to use photo editing software to reverse a right-facing portrait image; however, some editors employ this controversial technique when it does not alter obvious non-symmetrical features (such as Mikhail Gorbachev's birthmark) or make text in the image unreadable.

   * If there are too many images in a given article, consider using a gallery.
   * Do not place left-aligned images directly below second-level (===) headings, as this disconnects the heading from the text it precedes. Instead, either right-align the image, remove it, or move it to another relevant location.

* Use

to link to more images on Commons, wherever possible.

   * Use captions to explain the relevance of the image to the article (see #Captions).
   * Specifying the size of a thumbnail image is not necessary: without specifying a size, the width will be what readers have specified in their user preferences, with a default of 180px (which applies for the overwhelming majority of readers), and a maximum of 300px. However, the image subject or image properties may call for a specific image width to enhance the readability or layout of an article. Cases where a specific image width is appropriate include:
         o images with extreme aspect ratios
         o detailed maps, diagrams or charts
         o images in which a small region is relevant, but cropping to that region would reduce the coherence of the image
         o a lead image that captures the essence of the article (recommended not to be smaller than 300px, as this will make the image smaller for users who have set 300px in their user preferences).

   * Some users need to configure their systems to display large text; forced large thumbnails can leave little width for text, making reading difficult.

"

SO - 1. WP manual of style clearly states starting to the right is preferred. Then it states that when you add additional, you can use one on the left. 2. It also states and I quote "Generally, right-alignment is preferred to left- or center-alignment" - that means it is preferred but not mandated. and last 3. How does Redvers know I am not planning on inserting other images? How does he know what I am doing? Anwser? He does not - he edited, which was great, I saw it and said nada because I thought he improved the article with one exception - the image. When he changed the image, I asked him nicely not to do that and he just emailed me this long condescending talk page not about how I need to read up on WP.

I like cats too but Redvers is off on this one. I will change it back in a few days. If you have any other suggestions about how to deal with someone who clearly does not do their homework on others who have done their homework more, let me know.

Thanks archiemartinArchiemartin (talk) 00:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

CU talk page

The Talk:University of Colorado at Boulder page is getting rather unwieldy. Can we make an archive of the talk page, up until Jan 2007 or thereabouts? Sorry, but I don't know how to do this myself. Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 04:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

It's pretty easy. See WP:ARCHIVE. Give it a shot and if you can't do it, I will, but try first. MECU≈talk 13:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Wong Axis.png

This is an image from a PhD Thesis that is now in the public domain. Why are you deleting it? Stop wasting my time. Thanks. The list of licenses available is too limited: you need to increase it to include academic materials. Jmanooch (talk) 16:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Densha Otoko.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Densha Otoko.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 (talk) 19:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Question about adding infoboxes

Hi Mecu!

Ok - so now I am trying to add and infobox for Suz Andreasen and Dorie Nossiter. Can you tell me where I should look for formatting to follow? Thanks, archiemartinArchiemartin (talk) 21:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Image and 3RR question

I've posted this question on the 3RR talk, but I'm still looking for an answer...

Does the 3RR apply with regard to reverting images on the image page? I"m wondering because I'm running into an editor that is insisting on reverting an image file into a seriously over-sized version which he prefers. - J Greb (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

It applies to anything on a single article. Images definitely apply. "Stylistic" concerns are also covered. Talk it out. See input from other people. MECU≈talk 20:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

2007 Hawaii Bowl

Greetings, I am trying to get the 2007 Hawaii Bowl, article up to Good Article and than Featured Article status. I was hoping you could look over it and add information as you see fit, while I add content. Please respond on my talkpage if you need anything. Thanks, PGPirate 04:11, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 52	26 December 2007	About the Signpost

Wales appoints six arbitrators	Board approves expansion, up to 11 trustees possible
WikiWorld comic: "Molasses"	News and notes: Stewards, Senate testimony, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Plants
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Anadol

Hello Mecu. Article Anadol include a lot of non-free pictures. Is it normal? What do you thing about this? Kind regards. --Vikimach (talk) 17:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

That is a lot of fair use images in the article. You should leave a note on the talk page requesting that the "non-essential" ones be eliminated. They all see to have a source and license, but the rationale on some is quite lacking so you could mark them (be sure to subst:) {{nrd}} and notify the uploader and that may help. MECU≈talk 17:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks.--Vikimach (talk) 17:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Artcurators

Hi Mecu. Just a litte question, why did you delete two pictures shown on the article Eva M. Paar. I'm quite new here and i thougt i made most allright ;-) best regards Artcurators —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.78.167.251 (talk) 19:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi and welcome! You should always sign in to your account when using Wikipedia and always sign your messages on talk pages (non articles, like this one) with ~~~~. If you look at the history page of the article, it says I deleted them because of CSD I3, which you can read more about here. In short, we do not accept images that are "for Wikipedia only." MECU≈talk 19:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I will correct this. --Artcurators (talk) 19:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)