User talk:Stephen Turner/archive4

Image removal

You seem to have been removing images from pages when their images are tagged with "no source" or "unknown" after 7 days. Please don't do this. It makes it hard for admins to tell where the images are linked and makes it more difficult for us to use our judgment. If an image up for deletion is linked prominently I will often attempt to find a replacement, however I just delete offhand if it's not linked to by anything and meets the criteria. Please don't unlink images that are yet to be deleted by an admin but let the admin make an informed decision. Thanks. gren グレン 17:21, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

You are doing this after it's been no source for 7 days so you are doing nothing wrong. I got the timings wrong for what you were doing. Personally, I don't like how users remove the images but it's not against policy and is actually in line with it. So, pardon if the statement didn't make sense to you (I thought you were removing images when you added the "no source" tag, not when you added the "db-i4" tag. gren グレン 17:30, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Image copyrights

Hi, I understand perfectly, and in fact I was anticipating something like this - - I recently discovered uploading/using images and perhaps went overboard in the past week. I would like to know how to do this better -- can you guide me on how to ascertain the copyrights of images found on the web? Thanx in advance - ImpuMozhi 19:40, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Message

Hi - - I see that you have marked for deletion ALL the images I ever uploaded. Wondering whether there was any delibration / scrutiny, or whether my previous message to you confessing to ignorance provoked wholesale action? I appreciate the "70 years" note you left regarding Pataudi Sr's image, but that was before my message to you.

Also, are you an Administrator? If so, perhaps you could help by replying to my previous message to you. If not, perhaps this proactivity had best be left to admins who could help.

Furthermore, please note that:

• There is no chance of anyone objecting to use of photos of Abhinava Vidyateertha (who was like the Hindu pope) or Mokshagundam Vishveshwaraiya, a very public figure of a century ago.
• How can there be copyright on the images of Hindu Goddesses??
• "Image:Amrita Sunny Betaab.jpg" is a publicity poster for a movie; they should be delighted to have it disseminated.
• I put up snaps of the actress Amrita Singh since I saw that the page about her husband, the actor Saif Ali, contained a (website-derived) image which has been up since 18/Oct/05 without challenge. Again, film stars are unlikely to disapprove of decent publicity.
• If perchance the images of film stars are accepable, why not of cricketers, such as both Pataudi Sr & Jr?

ImpuMozhi 04:09, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Stephan, Thank you so much for the detailed info on copyrights -- I appreciate it. Obviously there is a lot for me to learn on this; I will read up the links you provided. Hopefully I can salvage some of those images! Thanks again. ImpuMozhi 18:58, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Images

Stephen,

Thanks for the tip and for stopping me from going over the top with adding jpegs.

Gotta dust down the digital camera out.

Whohe !!!

Stubs

I have removed/am removing the stub tags from Chandrasekhar Gadkari, Jenni Irani and Vijay Rajindernath. I looked through the usual, standard sources while writing them and couldn't find anything more that is useful. They are unlikely to get expanded in the future. Hope that's okay. Tintin 14:48, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

ACook.JPG

Hello Nv8200p,

Thanks for working on deleting images. One of my pet hates on Wikipedia is all the unlicenced images, and I spend a lot of time removing images from the cricket articles particularly.

However, in the case of Image:ACook.JPG, I had a conversation about this with the uploader, and it turned out that the photo was taken by his friend. I think he just didn't phrase the copyright notice very well. Partly my fault — I should have insisted on something more precise. But you might like to review User talk:Kroome111 and User_talk:Stephen_Turner#Cricket_image_sources and restore the image if you think it's OK.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 18:30, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

The images listed are not tagged well at all. They have a PD tag but no real source info. It needs to indicate who the copyright holder is. I think these images will all be deleted eventually unless more substantiation is provided on the image description page itself. See how I documented Image:Cheerleaders.jpg or Image:Big red boat 1998.jpg. It does not even have to be this extensive, but more then just a PD tag would be appreciated.

Images cannot be restored unfortunately. They may be found on a mirror site and re-uploaded. I'll look. - Thanks Nv8200p talk 19:26, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Peter Chingoka

I see that you've reverted the Peter Chingoka article on the grounds that he (and Bvute) were released without charge. But isn't the fact that Chingoka (and Bvute) were arrested notable in itself, even though no charges were pressed? Loganberry (Talk) 01:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Myself, I wouldn't tend to document when someone had been arrested and released without charge after a few hours. However, I probably wouldn't revert it either. The reason I reverted your version was that it said he had been charged, not just arrested. Stephen Turner (Talk) 08:24, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough; mea culpa. Loganberry (Talk) 15:12, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Alfred Sorongo Luseno

In my foolishness, I accidentally created an article many aeons ago about Kenyan cricketer Alfred Sorongo. Should we move this article to Alfred Luseno as per Cricinfo, or should we just create a redirect one to the other? It's only now that I'm adding proper sources that I realize I did this, but do we think it should be moved? Thank you. Bobo192 06:22, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello Bobo, thanks for your message.

I agree with you that it should be Alfred Luseno. I decided to be bold and I've gone ahead and moved the article (leaving a redirect from Alfred Sorongo). I hope that's OK!

Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Stephen Turner said: Hello Bobo, thanks for your message.

I agree with you that it should be Alfred Luseno. I decided to be bold and I've gone ahead and moved the article (leaving a redirect from Alfred Sorongo). I hope that's OK!

Thank you for changing these, I know I had two different articles pointing to the same person somewhere on my various sandboxes, but I wasn't sure which one I should have used for these. Thank you for changing these to where they were supposed to be, I'll have to resolve to be slightly more careful when I come back and create these in the right places.. :) Bobo192 11:23, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Cricketer list - cricketbot

Would cricketbot be able to generate a list of cricketers (ie. are in one of the cricketer categories), but are not in List of cricketers? Ergo, they are probably ==Domestic cricketers==. -- Ian ≡ talk 14:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Good idea, thanks. See User:CricketBot/missing cricketers. Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:57, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Grieg Williamson

I wasn't able to get this to you at the time, but the correct name for this cricketer is Grieg Williamson (real name John Grieg Williamson), not the other way around. Sorry I've not been around so much lately to answer these things. I may not be very accessible over the next couple of weeks, but otherwise everything should be okay. Thank you. (User:Bobo192)

Missing cricketers

Yeah, sorry, don't know what happened there. I've missed out David Hartshorn too, apparently. Poor work. Sam Vimes 12:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Missing articles

OMG - I was expecting 20 or so! How naive I am.

Thankyou for your work on that, that'll give me a nice little project fo a while at least. -- Ian ≡ talk 12:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Quiz

Stephen, according to rule 3 it's your go. ;-) -- Ian ≡ talk 05:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

S de Silva

Thanks :-\ Fixed it and created a two line article for KSC de Silva. Didn't know about the existence of the other de Silva :-( Tintin 14:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Statistics

Will it be possible to generate any statistics about the number of edits per day in the topics under WP:Cricket ? Tintin 14:15, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello Tintin. That's an interesting idea, and one I hadn't thought of. Are you looking for the number of edits per day since the article was created, or the number in the last month, or what? Is it useful for anything particular, or just for curiosity? Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Curiosity. WP:Cricket is supposed to be 'one of the most active projects' in wikipedia, just wanted to know how active we really are ! I am looking at the number of edits in the last month or so, and an update once in a while. Tintin 14:46, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Donation

Stephen, are you donating to Wikimedia? since Wikipedia is the love of your life, you should contribute to the costs of it. 203.3.197.249 00:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Cricket winning percents

The percents are now in line with CricInfo. A discussion has developed--Paul 15:27, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

RfA

Stephen, I am a bit disappointed but fully understand your reasoning. If you should have a change of heart any time, please let me know. And have a great Christmas and New Year. -- Ian ≡ talk 02:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

More sub-stubs

Hi Stephen. I think we may need another run of the CricketBot through the cricket biographies: user *Paul* has been creating some useful stuff on very elderly Australians, but they're all pretty short (though most seem to have infoboxes, which is good). Johnlp 18:23, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'll try and get round to it later this week. Thanks for pointing it out. Stephen Turner (Talk) 18:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I've been putting Infoboxes in the oldies (starting with Oz), when the page doesn't exist, I've put the basic stuff that can be gleaned for the CricInfo profile. What should I be putting in as a minimum, provided it can done without me having to manually type it in? jguk has been putting a Reference section in.. I could do that, but it's the same link as the Source in the Infobox, so is it necessary? --Paul 13:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)