Talk:Salisbury Mall (Maryland)

Untitled

Why is this going to be deleted, anyway? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steinerstein (talk • contribs)

Probably the minimal content, which gives little information about the location's notability. -Fsotrain09 17:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The Salisbury Mall and The Centre at Salisbury are two totally differently articles that have nothing to do with one another, they just happen to reside in the same town and county, This article was approved by a consensus last month. Alot of research was conducted on this article in question, and it would be a disservice to delete it. --MrWiki2007 10:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Why was the picture in this artice of the Salisbury Mall deleted recently? It has no copyright in question as it was from a persons own personal collection (although references WERE used in the Wiki article) from 1970, and the person in question has the same picture in question on another website http://mallsofamerica.blogspot.com/2005/10/salisbury-mall.html which the owner of said site received persmission before posting it there, and the person who contributed it to this article here at Wikipedia also got his permission. It would be nice if at least asked before deleting the hard work of Wikipedia editors, as it was not an easy task tracking down an 37 year old vintage picture.--Dataice 21:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Getting the author's permission to use it only at Wikipedia gets an image deleted on-sight. We're a free encyclopedia, and that includes our content. If other people cannot reuse our images they're no good to us. The upload form tries to make this clear, though I know most people don't bother reading it before hitting "upload". See Wikipedia:Image copyright. — Saxifrage ✎ 20:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't given permission to ONLY use on Wikipedia. Maybe you should think first before about opening that mouth of yours, as you tend to like to get people going, judging from your previous contributions here on ths site,so don't assume anything about the editors who put in many months of hard work collecting information on this aritcle. I guess that makes you feel rather important doesn't it? You know a kindly worded reply goes a LONG way, maybe you should subscribe to that,have a good day sir.--Sonicnukleo 15:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Cool your heels and remember that I'm here to help the encyclopedia, not fight uselessly. The above poster said that permission was granted for use, but they didn't say that it was licensed under a free license. There's a huge difference, and there's no reason for me to assume that when they said "permission given" that they actually mean something that is completely different. When people talk about permission at Wikipedia, it's considered helpful to explain that permission isn't what they think it it.

Anyway, I checked just now to see what the status of the image is, and I don't see what the problem is because it still exists: Image:SalisburyMallOld.jpg. — Saxifrage ✎ 21:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

However, I must note that the description above of how the image was given permission to use here and the copyright notice on the image page are contradictory, so the image might get deleted anyway if it violates our terms. — Saxifrage ✎ 21:23, 18 November 2006 (UTC)