This user may have left Wikipedia. Kosigrim has not edited Wikipedia since 7 November 2008. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!
Hi, just wanted to let you know that the image of the Kalachakra mandala on the Shambhala page appears to be of 'commercial quality' so to speak, as it contains some serious mistakes/omissions. For example, the orientation of the mandala is incorrect; the black/blue side should be turned to the bottom (east), and a part of the very center of the mandala is missing. Love rudy08:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rudy, Thanks for noticing. I know the Kalachakra it is nothing special (even for naive observer it may look beautiful). I still appreciate the work of the monk. From 'artistic-labor' perspective it is a lot of hours given the environment in Sera. When I was there I felt so much, and particularly regrets, I could not leave more from me there - for the Tibetan people. Unfortunately, most of money I spend to reach Tibet, where left in Chinese hands, but not in Tibetan people. Anyway, Tibet will always be in my heart and wait for me. Look at my other pages I put together about Tibet and Buddhism, and tell me what do you think? I plan to make many more...with time... With great sadness for Tibet and Tibetan people as well as appreciation of the past! With Compassion! regards, kosi
Thanks for great additions to Plantar fasciitis. I thought though most of the description was on the plantar fascia itself rather than the condition of its inflammation. I have therefore moved the anatomy & biomechanics to the previous stub of an article plantar fascia.
The biomechanics section in particular refers to research, studies and measurements but fails to cite the sources for this. You clearly will have the sources for this information, so could you please add the reference/citation details to plantar fascia - if you need any help using footnotes (WP:Footnotes) or marking-up citations, then please do ask - I'm happy to help. David RubenTalk16:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
David,
Thanks for doing that and for your desire to help. I was planning to add references. Was looking for a easy way to display a table.
You probably removed the Magnetic section? There is plenty of evidence for its efficacy. Don't you like the subject (holistic direction)?
Much of historical background info would be better in Magnetic therapy article itself, rather than this one condition article.
Comercial plug for obtaining the TheraP Magna-Dots seems inappropriate/spamming
As for magnetic therapy in plantar fasciitis, there are two levels of details that need verifying - firstly if a non-trivial number of people try to treat the condition this way (needs WP:Reliable sources such as a national newspaper article) - if can be so verified then I have no problem with articles mentioning that an alternative medical technical is tried by some people. However secondly is whether or not the technique actually works - very careful citing from WP:Reliable sources is required for such controversial alternative-medicine claims in order to WP:Verify. David RubenTalk16:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
{| border="1" If miss border parameter no separating lines
| Caption Caption is optional
|-
! Col 1 !! Col 2 !! Col 3 !! Col 4 Columns headed if use "!" instead of just "|"
|-
! Row A Rows headed again with "!" and a new line
| 1 || 2 || 3
|-
! Row B
| 2 || 4 || 6
|-
| Row C || 3 || 6 || 9 Rows not headed if use just pipes "|"
|- In essence start a new row with "|-" line and
| Row D || 4 || 8 || 12 then a "|" before 1st cell and "||" between each subsequent cell
|}
Hi, I'm going to nominate this article to appear on the Main Page in the Did you know section. I just wanted to comment on the licenses of the images you uploaded. You did not create the images yourself (i.e., you are not the artist), so the {{PD-self}} tag you put on them is incorrect. However, I think most of them will fall under {{PD-old}} because the original artist has been dead for more than 100 years. Please add more details to the image description pages -- for example, "Scene 1 from Eighteen Songs of a Nomad Flute, painted by [artist] ([born]-[died]), originally published in [year]." Also, assuming these are all public domain due to age, you may want to consider uploading them to Wikimedia Commons instead so that other-language Wikipedias can make use of them. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, howcheng {chat}18:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
>[reply]
Howard, glad you recognize the 'Eighteen Songs'.
I corrected two of the PD images.
The first on top, is my creation, but that is not important.
The 18 images are from a CD stock collection I had to resize and make identical as dimensions.
Every image from the stock has an attached text in Chinese, sometime meaningful some time not.
I will have a person who is helping with translation.
As soon as I have something on the artist will add it.
Let me know if you have further comments,
best, kosi
Hello Kosigrim and well done on your article. This article was kindly nominated by Howcheng. Do feel free to self-nominate in future like the majority of our entries, and happy editing. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your effort to intoduce our china culture to wikipedia. But I have to say that copyrights of the images incorporated in the gallery of this article havn't expired yet.These pictures are composed in the modern art style(of the latest 20years). As to image:18songs2.jpg,I don't think you create the images yourself.Even I feel difficult to understand these chinese character of the font Small Seal Script in this picture without context.
Thanks for paying attention to the 'Eighteen Songs of a Nomad Flute' and for your offer to help with Chinese language.
I have many friends here from China. The problem is that not everyone has the time to translate (it is not fast and straight forward as in many other Latin based languages). Most of Chinse people here are very busy with 'life' and do not have time to be ambassadors of culture.
To your note, I do not believe the art ever expires (perhaps, I did not use the proper label). This label was suggested by one of the administrators at wiki, I guess also Chinese. Art once created is eternal...as far as the copyright, in this case they were sold with the CD collection I purchased several years ago in China. Perhaps, you should address the issue to the manufacturer of the 100-CD collection I purchased.
My interest in this story is very personal and believe there is few messages in it beyond 'your' culture as you explicitly emphasize.
My intent was NOT to introduce the Chinese culture, that must be your role and to many of your countryman if they feel compelled.
I guess you may be right, a foreigner to the Chinese culture can miss many things to say, but where are the Chinese scholars at first place?
Hope you are one of them, and instead of 'criticising', better sit down and tarnslate something - share it with the world.
I would be looking forward to hear from you and especially will anticipate your cultural contribution with a great interest when you do so...
best,
kosi
According to the law of P.R.China(mainland) and R.O.China(taiwan). Copyright of works expires 70 years after its author's death, during which You may "fairuse" it according to the regulation of english wikipedia and the consesus of your community.
Besides, thanks for your encourage. however I will still continue to concentrate on contributing in chinese wikipedia for the following reasons: firstly, My english is very not very well. secondly, It's misery for us chinese to contribute here: I have to look for encrypted proxys to get on wikipedia due to the internet censorship firewall of our goverment, But english wikipedia system has disabled most of these open proxys from edition.
Please stop describing editors who disagree with you as egomaniacs. This is against the official policy of no personal attacks, and can ultimately lead to you being blocked. ALso, please do not remove warnings (like this one) from your talk page. – Tivedshambo(talk)17:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
♦ threatening users will not change how they may feel about and describe obsessive and destructive behavior user:kosigrim 12:40 (PCT) April 22, 2007
Some things to note: Tarsius spp. are haplorrhines, not strepsirrines. Your image is confusing in that regard. You may want to add other strepsirrines to the graphic. Catarrhini should be "apes and Old World monkeys" - your current wording makes it sound like apes are Old world monkeys. The rest are issues with the text that I'll clean up. You should look at the other Primate articles when doing work like this, as you contradict where we stand, as you'll see from my editing. Good work, though! I'll probably end up asking that this be merged into Primate though. - UtherSRG(talk) 18:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC) - UtherSRG(talk)18:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Stacey, thanks for working on the words and links. Primate is a good article itself (to enter). I do not share the philosophy of merging. Especially when pages become too long to scroll and particularly when there is different emphasis (the web gave us hyperlinks). If you are the 'master' of Primate and want to improve it in this direction - I can help. We can create a variation or different figure for that. On the 'contradiction' issue, I have to disagree. Primate clades was made not to contradict, but perhaps bring up to date challenges in primate cladistics. It is not supposed to be biased (if one could ever be in this field). Science is not uniform in opinion and will never be. Thanks for your feedback!
April 24, 2007, 11:58 (PCT)
Hello Kosigrim! The new picture in Primate clades is an improvement on the old one, that I believe was a copyvio. However the new one looks very familiar too. Are you sure that you drew it yourself, as claimed in your upload notice? What drawing program did you use? EdJohnston13:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I compiled it from variety of different elements. (sorry, in this case I used Photoshop, but normally I use Illustrator, is that the answer you are looking for?)
Please, Kosigrim. Answer my question. Your user page lists 269 image uploads. If you don't keep proper records, people are going to start imagining they are all copyright violations. EdJohnston17:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ed, feel free to investigate, seems there are so many copyright experts out there, besides, you can see that the page Primate clades has been marked, and removed - no point to discuss it anymore, I do not intend to waste more time. If you have other questions on other images, do not hesitate to ask or do what others are doing - there so much 'freedom' on wiki, and so many 'sensitivities', I do not have time to discuss copyright law in detail with everyone who seems 'playing' administrator (see below and everywhere).
Thanks for uploading Image:LanguageTree.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
To User talk:Grandmasterka: Image:LanguageTree.jpg belongs to Macmillan Publishers Limited, whose registered office is situate at Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS ("Macmillan"). The copyright and all other intellectual property rights in the material contained on this Web Site belongs to Macmillan or its licensors. The trademarks appearing on this Web Site are protected by the laws of England and international trademark laws. User talk:Grandmasterka: Your note of sufficiency is not very clear - hope this will do. If not - let it be deleted. user:kosigrim
What are the source of the images of the children on Image:ChildDevPoster.jpg? If you did not take these photographs yourself, the sources need to be specified for copyright reasons. If they are copyrighted, they may need to be removed. Along similar lines, what is the source of the diagram of the embryo? Thanks! -- Beland22:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:EagleHunter150.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image 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 image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. howcheng {chat}02:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On 30 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eagle hunting, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.
Photodisc - License Agreement, Grant of Rights. Subject to the terms of this Agreement: Licensee has the non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable right to Reproduce the Licensed Material identified in the Invoice an unlimited number of times in any and all media for the following purposes (together the “Permitted Uses”): Electronic publications including website design, up to a maximum resolution of 72dpi; Licensee has the right to have the Licensed Material Reproduced by subcontractors of Licensee, provided that Licensee ensures that such subcontractors agree to abide by the provisions of this Agreement. Licensee may alter, crop, manipulate and create derivative works of the Licensed Material. etc. See the complete description at: http://www.inmagine.com/license.php?brand=Photodisc
Little of the article has anything to do with the "lions's age". Why is it separate from lion? It needs to have a lot more than 2 paragraphs on the subject to be a separate article. Please continue the discussion at Talk:Lions’ age —Pengo04:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is very difficult to have discussion on a matter not understood. Yes, the last paragraph on the age is smallest. However, it addresses the issue of why would we need to measure the age, while lions are alive and for their preservation. Measuring age is not for 'fun' or separated as wiki-fact as you treated it. So if you measure amount of written words specifically addressed a disconnected issue (age indicator out of context) without understanding what is the meaning of the whole, that means either I could not convey the issue clearly as whole, or whoever is suggesting 'merger' does not get it. Additionally, there is one million and one things not described for lions. Are you going to put them all in one page? I think 'merger' policy is largely misconstrued (as I said automatically interpreted - without too much thinking). The beauty of the web is to have hyperlinks, that means connecting of information fragments not necessarily in one cohesive layout. The last can spare long scroll in the browser and perhaps get the attention of the reader better. On the other hand if one fragments too much (via hyperlinks) - one could loose the meaning of the presentation (which is not the case here).
The article is still there, it's just difficult to find because of the punctuation used in the title. (Lions’ age)... Generally articles stay together unless there's enough content for a second article on the topic. For example, there's an article on the History of the bicycle, but if it were only a paragraph long we'd keep it within bicycle until it got long enough. So yes, Lion is for everything about lions, even measuring their ages. Perhaps you'd like to add an introduction to Lions’ age explaining why it's important and to tie together the separate sections which (to me) seem to have little to do with lions' ages. I don't want to be adversarial and I appreciate that you're using your own time to contribute to Wikipedia. —Pengo15:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted it - somebody else had recovered it. Again, I do not share unconditional merger strategy, and will not edit others writings. I consider the matter close. Thank you for your time.
I see you've been making a lot of helpful edits regarding Eva Engvall, but it would be helpful if you could condense more of your edits into not as many separate ones. It makes the edit history longer and more confusing for those that need to poke around in it. Thanks, [Mac Δαvιs] ❖ 01:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid I do not quite understand. First, I created this page (an hour or so ago) and probably will improve it with time; secondly, what is the 'need to poke around'??? Let me know?
Sometimes we might need to check in an article's history for things, and for vandalism reversions are "protecting the right article." It's not that much of a big deal, I was just mentioning it. if you just created the article, then it is perfectly normal. [Mac Δαvιs] ❖ 01:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the prompt reply. I am glad that someone is on watch for vandalism! I had a case long ago, spent so much time to improve an article over the weekend, which got reversed entirely without explanation. That was very unpleasant and rude thing to do. From that time on I decided not to do significant changes on others' articles (if not at all). I have impression that wiki-vandalism is becoming a very broad term. There are so many self-proclaimed 'editors' who have no respect for the efforts of others. I think such 'editors' most probably do not come from academic environment, because they would have behaved differently. In any case, if you could illuminate briefly how exactly wiki is handling the 'diversity' in opinion (editing-reversing-editing) I would be grateful! Thanks/k
Very many of us are either entirely dedicated to, or watching for vandalism. We try and follow the WP:NPOV guideline universally, and, we're always watching that too. If you see anything questionable that was WP:vandalized or deleted, you can revert it yourself by visiting the history page of an article and finding the last good version, or alert an experienced user. Do you know which article was the one that was messed up before? I can fix it now if it wasn't already. [Mac Δαvιs] ❖ 02:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know now I can reverse it (even at the time I didn’t). But my question is a bit beyond instrumental (how can I?). What I was wondering is what if there is disagreement on content or aesthetics? What if different people have different view (no mater supported or not). I witnessed plenty of mindless comments and reasons for change. I personally do not have time to explain copyright or defend any arguments with laics. Since wiki gives 'freedom' to variety of enthusiasts, with a large difference in experience, discussions are impossible, and as result only wiki loses. That was my concern and related question. Otherwise the page I was referring to was Kendo, I do not intend to reverse anything, it seems most those who contributed so far, and particularly the one who made the reversal I mentioned, do not have anything to do with practical Kendo, the point to insist with non-practitioner is meaningless. What do you think?
If there is a disagreement on content or aesthetics then a number of things can happen:
WP:Edit war, WP:3RR, WP:NPOV, and more. This is when mean, WP:Uncivil, or obstinate people are editing. All these are unallowed, and there is no tolerance for instance, for 3RR.
Here is an example of a 3RR or edit warring message
Warning Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at Garrett A. Morgan. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. John25403:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please lay off the article Garrett A. Morgan, as it appears as though you are attempting to provide a one sided view. There are many sources out there for the claims that you are removing. I am busy right now and cannot, at the moment add them, but would appreciate if you do dispute them (with a tag), rather than delete them. Please put a tag {{fact}} beside the disputed claim. I do believe you are editing in good faith, but please allow the good faith of others also. It is good practice to first put a tag beside the disputed content, than to remove it altogether. That way others can realize it is in dispute and that they should do further research to back up the info. Again, please allow time until the sourses are added to the disputed content. (It takes time, there are many.) Thanks. - JeenyTalk03:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You do not have to be an expert, practitioner, or person who works in the field to edit Wikipedia's articles, and I believe this is the way it should be, definitely. That is the thing that makes Wikipedia, in my opinion, much better than for instance, Britannica. [Mac Δαvιs] ❖ 05:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Kosigrim. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:PrimatesTree.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Kosigrim/P-clades. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk08:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:LanguageTree.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot16:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Kosigrim. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:EagleHunter150.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Kosigrim/E-hunt. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk01:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Kosigrim. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:HIVcasesChina.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Kosigrim/HIV-Yunnan. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk07:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Kosigrim, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:PPChemistry.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Kosigrim/test-template2. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk05:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On 18 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tree of physiology, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Diet and cancer is probably on your watchlist, but in case you missed it, please have a look at my comment on the (new) talk page. Since you're from Bulgaria, you might find this of interest and relevant to my comment: http://squat.beinsa.info/
Please stop going through my user page and tagging everything unless there is a genuine concern. At present, it looks more like retribution because I tagged your article. Thanks. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 01:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have genuine concern as the tag said
I'd consider them valid if you weren't copying and pasting the tags I placed and using my user page as a map for places to put them as this looks retaliatory. However, if you do have legitimate concerns, I'm sorry if there was any bad faith on my part. You can replace the tags if you want as other editors work on those pages too (except Patent scientist since I've listed it for speedy delete and it may not be there for long). -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 01:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article you created for Abgent appears to be (at least in part) a copyright violation of portions of their web site. I have edited the article extensively to remove copyright violation concerns (as much as I could) and any advertising tone. I think the company has some notability, but I have tagged it so other editors can look into it. Just a friendly head's up since we got off on the wrong foot and this was a big edit. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 01:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is no copyright concern with Abgent - I was the patent manager of Abgent, and have all the rights to use some of their marketing materials - If I need your advice on patent law I will ask, thanks in advance! /PS: perhaps it would be beneficial if you try to create something on your own, I guess would be more productive...not last, please look at time and dates, no need to edit somebody's work at the time of creation - it would create more work.
You may have the rights to use it, but in order for it to be on Wikipedia, the content must be completely free to use. Since, for example, the website has a copyright notice reserving all rights, the content is not free to use. This is all covered more extensively at WP:COPY. Just as a note, anyone can edit and at any time, so talking about "somebody's work" suggests you think you have ownership, which isn't the case. In fact, you really shouldn't create articles about your company because of conflict of interest. Oh and I have and do create articles on my own. Thanks. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 02:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is NO 'conflict of interest' - I do not work for the company (if you can read), but even if I do, it is non of your concern. Why don't you go and address all your newly acquired 'patent' knowledge over 'commercial' pages such as Microsoft, or even about pages as George W. Bush - they all have 'interest' behind, and at the same time information (no one can deny). And if you create pages on your own, you would have more respect to the labor involved, as well as more skills to do proper layout changes - instead of destroying pages messing up the layout...
I have no idea what you have 'tried', but to inflict your one-sided opinion, perhaps you should acquaint your self with WP:AGF before engaigng in pseudo-moral self-entertaining criticism. And most of all carefully reading both articles in target (or claims if any). I guess reading is something that evades many here, after all wiki is far from academic, wishfull I regret...
Please read WP:CAT. You are seriously overcategorizing. A monastery is not a lama, it is not a religion, it is not a school, etc. You are also listing too many unrelated topics in see also. Please read the manual of style and try to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia style better! Cundi01:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please give examples, I have no idea what are you talking about?!?! What are the pages you are referring to?
Thanks for uploading Image:2Eagles.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
I am curious why your many additions of reference & wikify tags do not appear on your contibution history. Also you have tagged many articles that were in fact referenced, some using inline citations, and that were perfectly well wikified - including several that have been on the main page in DYK. Please explain. Johnbod01:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
1/ I do not share the view that 'inline' as you call them, if identical to online 'sources' are credible reference (millions of pages a published online and few have credibility); 2/ I do not see any references here: Peintre-graveur, Print_room, High_culture, Antonio_Abondio, Working in layers etc, do you? 3/ Subjects like Oil sketch one could hardly call encyclopedic, no wonder it is difficult to provide references to such common-knowledge or simply compound nouns; 4/ The etymology of the Museum is encyclopedic subject, however, one could dwell on management from 101 angles - I find that hardly encyclopedic. It falls into managerial field I am afraid; 5/ Subjects like Old Master may have grounds, one could not say without research, but since such compound noun is again not supported by any references, it might be entirely in the mind of the creator therefore eccentric view with no significance; 6/ The issue of Heavy cavalry is almost identical to the previous notion, it is a compound noun with no significance, cavalry itself is describing enough the essence. In that respect, one could enlist all possible known to man kind compound nouns as encyclopedic. They are simply subject of linguistic knowledge and repertoire; 7/ I can continue in the same line, but I am afraid, if some of those are not obvious, even you may seek support by some 'wiki-guideline', It would hardly change the matter, and would indicate a doze of naïveté. At the end, I would not approach this critical domain if there was not so much morality and unconstructive tagging out there including yours. Before engaging in matters of others you should look in your own domain first if that applies to your culture, education or academic experience at all.
1)You have not answered my question as to why your edits do not appear in your edit history. There may be a valid reason for this, but if you do not supply one I will certainly take the matter further.
2)Several of the articles you mention have hardly been edited by me, though many have.
3)I'm afraid your knowledge of English does not appear adequate to judge what is a valid encyclopedic entry and what is not. There is just no issue with oil sketch, heavy cavalry and old master.
4)"Inline" citations are not the same as "online" references at all, but I'm afraid I have enough to do here without adding English lessons.
5) It seems to me your edits risk being disruptive. In particular, removing any matter based on your opinions as shown in the edits and above might well be regarded as such by myself and other editors.
Johnbod18:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Claims of English language superiority are valid as much as the claims of England’s superiority over cultures they have tried to sack and consume - nothing but convenient double standard mixed with Nazi syndromes. The knowledge of English was not an issue here, but ABSENCE of REFERENCES, as tagged. Perhaps it was Santa Claus who have created the above 'pseudo-articles' as found in User:Johnbod page?
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:T-phayrei.jpg, by Calliopejen1, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:T-phayrei.jpg is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:T-phayrei.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:T-phayrei.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 209:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You uploaded the image LanguageTree.jpg, which has been deleted and replaced with the SVG Image:Indoeuropean_language_map.svg. This latter image is unsourced, and I'm not sure what it's actually meant to be showing. Certainly not genetic relatedness. Anyway, could you please cite your sources and add a description of what it actually is? Thankyou. —Felix the Cassowary10:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:25piastres.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.∆16:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:25piastres.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot19:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:ABsign.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner.OsamaKBOT19:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TutrakanBattle.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:TutrakanBattle.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.
Thanks for uploading Image:Ganjin150.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fg206:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Atg4-wiki.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Atg4-wiki.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.
Thanks for uploading Image:50piastres.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.
Thanks for uploading Image:10rupees.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.
Thanks for uploading Image:25piastres.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.
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:T-delacouri.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aksi_great (talk) 06:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:T-hatinhensis.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aksi_great (talk) 06:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:De chirico 1914 childs brain.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:De chirico 1914 childs brain.jpg. 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) 20:20, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An image that you uploaded, Image:BCtimeline.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stannered (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see your diagram of the MAP-kinase signaling pathways is listed on Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Images_to_improve#MAPK_pathways because someone thinks it would be better as an SVG. What software did you use to create it? Maybe it would be easier to convert to SVG from a source file than a JPEG? Please comment at the graphic lab. --Slashme (talk) 16:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:105mm-Kroop-HowitzerBG-WWI.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ViperSnake15121:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:9Ydancer1828s.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:51, 3 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK06:51, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the image can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{non-free fair use in|article name that the image is used in}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the image. If the image has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:NSMiklos1-wiki.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ukexpat (talk) 20:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:NSMiklos1-wiki.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Latebird (talk) 13:21, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image permission problem with Image:BGGriffin-wiki.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:BGGriffin-wiki.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Latebird (talk) 13:25, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image permission problem with Image:CellCyclePathway.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CellCyclePathway.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 18:19, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While the objects shown are indeed PD because of age, the photographs are not. They look like scanned from a catalog. If you made them yourself, then you need to clearly indicate that and supply a suitable license.
All of those show copyrighted sculptures. This makes them derivate works, which must not be published without the sculptors consent. If the sculptor does want to give such permission, then he needs to send an OTRS ticket to one of the e-mail addresses given on this page as evidence. Such a permission can be for specific images, images made by you, or any other criteria that serve the purpose, as long as the Wikipedia licensing requirements are met (derivate works and commercial user must be allowed).
For those images that are properly licensed (eg. all photographs made by you in public places), I recommend to upload them to the Commons. This will make sure that Wikipedia projects in other languages can also use them without any extra work. --Latebird (talk) 17:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:A-bird.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading File:AnalytikPreis25%.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading File:Mother&child-HIM.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading File:CytoscapeHome.jpg. 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. BJBot (talk) 05:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File:ChinaMapKosigrim.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:ChinaHIVAIDSmap.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:ChinaHIVAIDSmap.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:UniversitySquare.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanztalk18:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File permission problem with File:Eiga-tsuki-wiki2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Eiga-tsuki-wiki2.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanztalk01:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:18songs.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanztalk01:37, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File permission problem with File:KnowYourPersonality.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:KnowYourPersonality.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanztalk09:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File permission problem with File:PF-MagnaDots.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:PF-MagnaDots.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanztalk09:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Kosigrim! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 5 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autophagy network until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. MichaK (talk) 08:59, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A search on GNews and GBooks finds no matches or any evidence of claim of this artist being notable for introducing a new form of modernism in Bulgaria (which would make it at least 40 years behind the rest of Europe). The article has persisted since 2007 without any sources to support the claims made and it seems unlikely that any will be found to meet the criteria of WP:ARTIST in the near future.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
HM. Somdetch Phra Paramendr Maha Chulalong Korn, King of Siam
HM. The queen of Siam
P.17 [Royal Barge] On the Menam
P.19 From an ancient Siamese manuscript in the Oriental Manuscript Department of the British Museum 1. Refers to rules to be observed in building a house to ensure its being lucky. 2. Relates to the rules for finding buffaloes or bullocks stolen or strayed. 3. Relates to the happiness of otherwise of proposed marriages.
P.20 Rapids on the Menam near Chiengmai
Ruins of Wat Yai at Ayuthia
P.21 The floating bazzar at Ayuthia
P.23 Wat Phra, Prang Luang
P.25 Staircase to the shrine of Khow Phrabate
P.27 Interior of Wat Suthat
P.28 Wat Poh, inside which is the sleeping Buddha, 145 feet in length
P.29 The courtyard in Wat Phra Keo
P.31 Hills at Petchaburi
P.32 The caves at Petchburi
P.32 Native drawings from an ancient manuscript in the Oriental Department of the British Museum
P.35 Wat Cheng from the river
P.36 Rlrphants in ancient war dress
P.37 A state barge on the Menam
P.38 Phra chedit (pagoda) and Wat at Prapatom
P.39 Watsuthat, showing stone carvings
P.40 Wat Chaiya Mongkhon
P.42 Siamese Brahmin Priests
P.45 A bonze Buddha at Ayuthia
P.47 Siamese women of the peasant class
P.49 A LUK-SIT--a boy who serves a priest in return for tuition
P.51 View of the city of Bangkok in 1824.
P.52 Floating house on the Menam (From "The Kingdom and People of Siam")
P.53 Front of the main building of the King of Siam's palace as it existed in 1824. (From "The Kingdom and People of Siam")
A Siamese official of the early nineteenth century. (From "The Kingdom and People of Siam")
P.54 The old palace at Bangkok as it was in 1824. (From Crawfurd's "Embassy to Siam"
A prince of the early nineteenth century in full dress. (From "The Kingdom and People of Siam")
P.55 Phra Putta Lotlah, King of Siam, 1809-24.
A Siamese official of the early nineteenth century. (From "The Kingdom and People of Siam")
P.56 A Mandarin of the early nineteenth century in ordinary costume. (From "The Kingdom and People of Siam.")
A Siamese woman of the early Nineteenth century. (From Crawford's "Embassy to Siam.")
A Siamese man of the early Nineteenth century. (From Crawford's "Embassy to Siam.")
P.57 Bangkok in 1824. (From Crawford's "Embassy to Siam.")
P.58 Palace containing the ashes of former kings of Siam as it existed in 1824. (From "The Kingdom and People of Siam."
P.59 Sir John Bowring. (From " The Kingdom and People of Siam.")
Thank you for uploading File:Kendo-points.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Thank you for uploading File:Kendo-point-wiki.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Thank you for uploading File:Keikogi-wiki.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Thank you for uploading File:Keikogi-hakama-wiki.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Thank you for uploading File:HadjiolovLabPeople.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Thank you for uploading File:Narodakini150.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
Thank you for uploading File:GoldJugVratsa150.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Thank you for uploading File:LiturgicalBookCase.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Thank you for uploading File:ChiprovtziPlate150.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Thank you for uploading File:Moritoshi-1860-Mito.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Your upload of File:AltynDepeMap.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out)11:43, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You created the page "Persian-Sassanid art patterns" on March 30, 2007. It included the phrase, "A typical art motif from identified in the toreutics of Nagy Szent Miklos' treasure (1799) - 'griffin fighting an elk' (see figure on top right) - has been discovered 108 years latter in the tombs of Hsiung-nu (early Huns) during Colonel Pyotr Kuzmich Kozlov expedition (1907-09) near Urga (Outer Mongolia)." You probably meant, "A typical art form..." Later, the portion was changed to "A typical art motif identified..." and then to, "A typical art motif identified in the Treasure of Nagy Szent Miklos (1799) toreutics...". Next, it was changed to, "Hundred (108) years after the excavation of the Treasure of Nagy Szent Miklos' (1799) where a toreutics portrays a 'griffin fighting an elk' (see figure on the left) - similar art motif identified has been discovered..." and "Hundred and eight years after the excavation of the Treasure of Nagy Szent Miklos' (1799) where the toreutics portrays 'griffin fighting an elk' (see figure on the left) - similar griffin-elk motif has been discovered...", then "Hundred and eight years after the excavation of the Treasure of Nagy Szent Miklos' (1799) with a toreutics expo of 'griffin fighting an elk' (see figure on the left) - another griffin-&-elk motif has been discovered...". After that, "...Treasure of Nagyszentmiklós..." and so on. What did you mean when you said, "from"? Did you mean "form"? If so, I can fix it through the revisions. Jwoodward48wiki (talk) 02:26, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
File source problem with File:Sitatapatra-woodblock150.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Sitatapatra-woodblock150.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Nairatmya, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from Miranda Eberle Shaw (2006), Buddhist Goddesses of India, page 387, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:
If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Nairatmya and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Nairatmya, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the material is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Nairatmya with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Nairatmya saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.
Hello, Kosigrim. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "C-sur".
In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for uploading File:Jocho-Buddha150.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hunting with eagles until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Thank you for uploading File:FoucaultPendulum1851.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
-2007-05-14T08:02:00.000Z-Image:PrimatesTree.jpg){kind=link}
){kind=link}
-2007-05-16T07:53:00.000Z-Image:HIVcasesChina.jpg){kind=link}
-2007-05-17T05:25:00.000Z-Image:PPChemistry.jpg){kind=link}
Thanks for uploading Image:25piastres.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
Thanks for uploading File:CytoscapeHome.jpg. 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).
){kind=link}
wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
Hello Kosigrim! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 5 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
