User talk:Mareino/Archive 8

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

File copyright problem with File:Lily_Tomlin--Hair_helmet.jpg

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Lily_Tomlin--Hair_helmet.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. MBisanz ^talk 08:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

It also needs a license from the list at Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/All#Non-free_content. MBisanz ^talk 02:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:How Few Remain Front Cover.jpg

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thank you for uploading File:How Few Remain Front Cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jack Merridew 04:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Rick Reilly

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

My mistake, nothing was on the talk page about this issue before, I was looking at a different issue. However, Dayewalker brought up "Rmv, humorous personal analysis of his style from a dental perspective is undue, and unsuitable for an encyclopedia. Please discuss on talk page and try and gain consensus." when removing the teeth bit before. Despite this, I think that the bit should be added back, unless you agree with Dayewalker's assessment. Sorry for any trouble that I caused.--Henry talk 17:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Conrad Dobler

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I was trying to make the article interesting, God forbid. Kindly go be "troubled" someplace else. RMc (talk) 20:05, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jeffrey..jpg

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jeffrey..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 "file" 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 "File" 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. Skier Dude (talk) 05:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Give Me Love (Give Me Peace on Earth)‎

Latest comment: 14 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

You added {{verify-section}} to the covers section of "Give Me Love (Give Me Peace on Earth)‎". Was there something in particular that you thought was dubious? — John Cardinal (talk) 20:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't find any of it dubious. I just find it unverified. As the Wikipedia proverb goes, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth — that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true." Ideally, every mention of an artist covering "Give Me Love" should have a link to some non-Wikipedia source, such as a discography, review, or maybe even a (free) online version of the cover song itself. --M @r ē ino 20:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I am all in favor of citing sources, but the WP policy doesn't require that every single statement be sourced. In the policy article you quoted above, the next line is "Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged" (my emphasis). Most cover entries aren't be challenged. IMO, it's busy work to cite sources for cover song releases, and especially so when there are no claims such as "it reached number one..." or "was a worldwide hit" or the like.

While I don't think the notice is necessary, I am not going to remove it unless I add sources for everything. You've essentially challenged the entries and so they should be sourced. I think it's just as important to remove the non-notable entries such live covers by obscure acts that were never released. That tends to be my focus when editing cover sections. — John Cardinal (talk) 20:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Not for nothing, but shouldn't this have had a source? — John Cardinal (talk) 21:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Good idea -- done! --M @r ē ino 15:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Mareino/Evil Adam

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

User:Mareino/Evil Adam, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Mareino/Evil Adam and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Mareino/Evil Adam during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey, thank you for the barnstar! I knew that the list of coaches on Georgetown Hoyas had previously been sourced to one of their annual magazines, but that was from 2007 and some positions have since changed. Anyways, the directory should probably be kept up to date, and we can check for changes periodically. Thanks again!-- Patrick, _oѺ^∞ 20:01, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Foghorn with hens.jpg

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Foghorn with hens.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file 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 file 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 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:39, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles 05:09, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I tried it out on one of the test pages, and it seemed to work. --M @r ē ino 18:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Piano Lesson cover.jpg

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Piano Lesson cover.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:58, 18 February 2011 (UTC)