User talk:Werieth/201401

request to undo deleting images

Please undo deletion of images from the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Razumovsky. Permission to use images on this page was granted by Wikimedia Permissions on 17 December 2013. Permission code {{permissionOTRS|2013113010009112}} has been inserted on every page of every uploaded image. Please let me know if I need to do anything else. Sincerely, МЛР (talk) 12:59, 28 December 2013 (UTC)МЛР Maria Razumovskaya, copyright holder

I have requested further clarification on exactly what license was used, and exactly what was released. Werieth (talk) 13:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

The images were (all, as far as I've checked) uploaded on the 27th with an OTRS permission granting generous use on WP.

Why then did you blank all of them after this date, citing WP:NFG? NFG is specifically clear that it does not always apply and that some fair use galleries may be valid, depending on context (as always, you have no interest in context or discussion, when a simplistic view better fits your overall agenda). Also, in what way do these images (with a generous OTRS licence permitting widespread use at WP) fial NFG?

You might dislike the use of non-free licences here, as the use of a WP-only licence does significantly affect the reusability of WP content involving such. However you're not addressing that as an honest issue, you're just abusing NFG to get yet more deletions pushed through. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Andy Wikipedia only licenses are not valid, in fact they are grounds for immediate deletion. The issue here is that the photos have two separate licensing issues, One for the photo itself, and the second for the art itself. If the release only applies to the photos the files would still remain under full copyright, and WP:NFCC would apply. If the artist in fact released both the photo and contents then the media would not fall under WP:NFCC. NFG states that there are rare exceptions, a gallery of non-free files on an artist page is not one of them. I have asked you to stop stalking my edits, stop or I will get a topic ban for you. Werieth (talk) 14:18, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Then take that up with OTRS. NFG is still no excuse for a complaint on that basis. Be a deletionist if you must, but at least be an honest one. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:21, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

The files are currenly listed as non-free and thus I removed them, There was never a OTRS confirmation which I have recently requested. Stop your personal attacks now, calling my actions dishonest is a lie. I am not being a deletionist, just abiding policy. I will ask you one last time, say off my talk page and stop wikistalking me. Werieth (talk) 14:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

So you're also stating that either OTRS:2013113010009112 is invalid, or that it doesn't imply that {{Non-free with permission}} (as used at File:Tianitolkai (Pushmi-pullyu). Toy.jpg) is applicable? Either way, your beef is with OTRS (who exist so that such assertions can be relied upon by the mere grunt editors such as you & I who don't have OTRS access). NFG still isn't an appropriate basis for your blanket deletion. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually any user can throw a OTRS number on a file, until it has a {{ConfirmationOTRS}} which was placed via an OTRS member the release is questionable. Until it is confirmed that both the copyright for the photo and for the underlying work are released, Which is very doubtable that the artist would do that, (More often they are just releasing the specific photos, which have a dual copyright issue, See also Derivative work, and the underlying work is still copyrighted). NFG is perfectly applicable as it is a gallery of non-free files, until such time as OTRS confirms that they are free. Werieth (talk) 15:25, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

I have used an opportunity to undo the deletion offered on the view history page. After this I have provided a more detailed rationale of the non-free, fair use of all images, as required. I do hope this will be sufficient now. If you need proof of copyright I will be happy to send you a copy of my father's will, as well as my original letter to Wikimedia Permissions and their reply letter granting permission to use the requested images. Best regards and a happy new year! Maria Razumovskaya МЛР (talk) 15:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)МЛР

If you have any further questions regarding release, here is the link to the page of the person who sent me the permission code <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ze-dan>. МЛР (talk) 16:01, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• I have requested further clarification from OTRS, if the files are in fact released the licenses on the images need corrected. Werieth (talk) 22:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks to the assistance of Russian administrators, I have corrected the release code on all pages. The files have been released under Free Documentation License. Hope everything is clear now. МЛР (talk) 10:59, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Issue

I just now noticed a couple of edits you made back in October 2013 to some wrestling articles. I've been away for a while and was expanding some articles you edited. The main edits were removal of professional wrestling posters. I just wanted you to know how disruptive your edits have been as now you have deleted content that really can't be retrieved again through normal research means as replacements for some of the images deleted don't exactly exist. Several of them were hard to come back in the first place that were usable. So again, thanks for the edits.--WillC 12:53, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Wrestlinglover Ill ignore your sarcastic insults, but the issue boils down to the fact that the files removed failed to meet [[WP:NFC][] and where thus removed. Werieth (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually they didn't because those articles weren't lists. Take a look at TNA Bound for Glory. Each article has the same basic format. Results have have been listed in there but the articles were under-developed. You assumed, were wrong, and have thus deleted material citing a policy that didn't cover the issue at hand.--WillC 02:17, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually there where several discussions which established that the yearly sections within those articles qualifies as a list and thus WP:NFLISTS applies. WP:NFCC #1,3,8 also come into play. Just because the primary article subject isnt a list doesnt mean that part of the article that is a list exempts the article from policy. Werieth (talk) 02:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

So your idea of improvement is to delete needed images? That is a fantastic way to help the project, considering you aren't familiar with the subject. True those are yearly subjects, but the only list featured in the article was the table. Each one of those sections don't discuss just the event but subjects connected to the event but also surrounding areas, so you are incorrect in assuming it is a list. Each section is to discuss the impact of hosting said event, not what changed from year to year. They only have the year as the header as a means of organization. Afterall, those images had existed in there since 2005, 2006, and 2007. If they violated that policy, someone would have noticed it way before you.--WillC 07:36, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of uploaded non-free images from my userpage

Hi Werieth, I've noticed that you've removed the gallery of non-free images that I've uploaded to the English Wikipedia during this year from my "User page". The only explanation for this action that I was able to find was a reference to a policy that you make in the "Edit summary":

Restrictions on location. Non-free content is allowed only in articles (not disambiguation pages), and 
only in article namespace, subject to exemptions. (To prevent an image category from displaying thumbnails,
add __ NOGALLERY __ to it; images are linked, not inlined, from talk pages when they are a topic of 
discussion.)

If I understand correctly this policy definition, a "User page" is neither a "disambiguation page" nor a "talk page", so it's unclear to me what policy definition exactly was breached to cause the removal of these images. I'd appreciate if you can please further explain this issue better, so I can understand why you took this action.

Please also note that as I initially just listed the file names, it would have been enough to remove the brackets so the images didn't show in my user page. Thanks & regards, DPdH (talk) 17:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) This is NFCC9, and the explanation is there, though it could probably be clearer - non-free content is only allowed in articles (article namespace) - user pages are not articles, just as disambiguation pages or talk pages aren't. Black Kite (talk) 17:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks Black Kite for clarifying this point; obviously the difference between both is explained somewhere else than in NFCC9. If that's the case, then I'm ok with the image removal, my apologies for having added them. Now I've listed the name files again in my user page (no links) and I suppose that this doesn't breach any policy. Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 01:37, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
    • The details on what an article is: Wikipedia:Article_space#Namespace. You can actually link to a file File:Example.jpg by prefixing it with a : Werieth (talk) 01:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

List of LSU Tigers players in the NFL Draft

Hi Werieth, I noticed you deleted multiple images from the List of LSU Tigers players in the NFL Draft page that are free images taken from wikipedia pages and not from the internet. Could you please help me understand why it is not acceptable to use the images taken from other wikipedia pages to use on another wikipedia page? I thought this was acceptable especially if it relates to the same topic. Thanks,spatms (talk) 11:47, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

spatms The issue is that there are two types of files on wikipedia: Images that are either out of copyright or are under a what are often called copyleft licenses (aka free media), and second those that fall under our policy on non-free media aka copyrighted stuff. The files that you removed happen to fall under that second category and their use on wikipedia is very restricted due to the fact that copyright is still an issue. Werieth (talk) 22:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Werieth for getting back to me. It's hard to tell what is free and non-free, but I will do my best to not use non-free. I thought if the image was on wikipedia then it was ok to use. spatms (talk) 16:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

If you have hidden categories its just a matter of looking for All non-free media category. Werieth (talk) 06:28, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits to 2013 Egyptian coup d'état

Thanks for your recent edits to 2013 Egyptian coup d'état. However there is one edit I would be pleased if you would clarify. That is removing "Party Secretary-General Galal Murra" referenced comment. --Mohamedhp (talk) 13:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

@Mohamedhp: That would be because of human error, I must have deleted that by accident, Ive restored the text. Werieth (talk) 17:47, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Its ok then and thanks for your efforts and concern.--Mohamedhp (talk) 22:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits on my user page and my sandbox page

I should think WP:Civil would be enough to encourage notifying me if you think my pages infringe on a Wikipedia requirement for non-free image use, and then let me judge the action to take. I read your actions as a WP:GF failure. I understand the Wikipedia community standards to encourage civil interaction among editors. That means, in this case:

• point out what you consider a problem
• indicate the relevant Wikipedia guidelines and requirements
• request I make what you consider a necessary change.

I feel you have not encouraged cooperation nor engendered enthusiasm for this collaborative project.

I had used, on my home page, a small image of the flag of the city Alameda, California, US to indicate a city I have called home. Your unilateral removal of the image materially changed the message I chose to place on my user page; without the choice of replacing it with an equivalent to maintain the message.

I am now reverting your edit on 'my' user page. Please notify me, by replying to this post, of what you would like to request I do concerning the Alameda flag image, and the reasons for your request. I will reply promptly. - Neonorange (talk) 22:01, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

• Neonorange Re-adding that file violates our non-free content policy the particular point is non-negotiable, You cannot have that image on your user page, period. If you care to replace it with something else its not an issue, as long as it is free media. It is not a GF failure. It is actually quite common (I just removed about 200 non-free files that where used in non-articles), and fairly routine to remove them. When I removed the file I left a clear edit summary which stated why the file cannot be used, and a link to the relevant policy (WP:NFCC#9). Werieth (talk) 22:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

OK, so the image presence is non-negotiable. So is my request for civility. You should have requested I take the action and leave me the choice of how to maintain the same message. Ask,and then we will both win what we consider adhering to the pillars of Wikipedia. - Neonorange (talk) 22:14, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Neonorange Asking you to remove a NFCC violation is often doubles the workload of those who enforce WP:NFCC, having to leave a note on a talk page and then come back later to remove the file when the issue isnt addressed. You do not own your user page, please see WP:UP#OWN it is common practice for others to routinely make such edits (NFCC#9, and some category based bots come to mind off hand). My actions are completely civil and according to policy. However your blind reverts without knowing or understanding policy and then false accusations of uncivil behavior is questionable behavior in itself. Werieth (talk) 22:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Being civil is more work; that extra work makes civilization work.

From Wikipedia:User pages:

• All of these pages are your user pages or user space. While you do not "own" them, by custom you may manage them as you wish, so long as you do so reasonably and within these guidelines.
• Users believed to be in violation of these policies should first be advised on their talk page using {{uw-userpage}} when immediate action is not otherwise necessary.
• Non-free images found on a user page (including user talk pages) will be removed (preferably by replacing it with a link to the image) without warning and, if not used in a Wikipedia article will be deleted entirely. [emphasis added]

I understand the meaning of non-free images, I just did not notice the non-free nature of the image of the Alameda, CA flag. I will be more careful in the future. And that's all I ask of you. - Neonorange (talk) 23:06, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Neonorange may I quote back a phrase? Non-free images found on a user page ... will be removed ... without warning In your case this is exactly what happened. I am unsure of why you are calling it uncivil, and why you reverted after I pointed the issue and fact that the file is non-free out. Werieth (talk) 23:21, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

OK, Werieth, I agree that you acted in good faith. We don't agree on approaches: will is not shall, and (preferably by replacing.... I guess that's one reason it takes me so much time to accomplish an edit. I understand that you want to contribute as much as possible to Wikipedia. So do I. I support the contributions you make, even though my approach would be different. I have learned from your discussion of the issue here. Thanks and have a great new year! - Neonorange (talk) 23:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Have a good New Year yourself. Werieth (talk) 23:55, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Received Pronunciation

Hello, thanks for your messages about the copyright status of the material I submitted for Received Pronunciation. I have put a reply on my Talk page and hope this will help to move us forward. RoachPeter (talk) 15:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Here's the latest on my actions to save the RP recording from being deleted:

Following your request, I have inserted the "di-replaceable fair use disputed" line in the file description page. I have had to guess a bit at exactly where this should be positioned (the instructions were not clear) so I hope that does the job. Secondly, you say that I should add a full explanation on the file discussion page. I was not able to find this, so I have created a Talk page associated with with file and put in what I think are the main facts. Again, I just have to hope that this is more or less what I was supposed to do.

Kwamikagami has come up with some useful advice (see my Talk page) and suggested I apply for an OTRS ticket for the recording, which is apparently another approach. I can't see any reason not to have a go at this - except that I am rushing to get ready to move house tomorrow! RoachPeter (talk) 12:38, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Non-free review template on article pages

Recently, it was determined that {{Non-free review}} is only to be used on file pages, with an exception for leaving it on article pages where the template was already transcluded. I removed the template from BioShock Infinite and left a note about the NFCR discussion on the talk page. Thanks, RJaguar3 | u | t 01:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Questions

Could you let me know what was wrong with the Kiss FM logo, KBKO logo and KVMX logo that were on the KPSL-FM article, or, why they didn't meet the WP:NFG. (JoeCool950 (talk) 06:38, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

Usage of non-free media isnt allowed in galleries. Werieth (talk) 06:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

What don you mean in galleries?? The KVMX logo wasn't from a gallery.. (JoeCool950 (talk) 06:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

Actually it was, it was just not using the <gallery> tag. Werieth (talk) 06:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Whatever. (JoeCool950 (talk) 06:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

Then the KPSL-FM logo would be gallery, and why isn't that one a problem?? (JoeCool950 (talk) 06:55, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

I am only seeing the primary logo in the infobox. Werieth (talk) 06:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Are all previous logos considered gallery?? (JoeCool950 (talk) 07:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

It all depends on the article, in this case your usage is a gallery. Werieth (talk) 07:02, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

How can you tell?? (JoeCool950 (talk) 07:06, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

Unless there is sourced critical commentary about the logo, and its previous versions, referenced to third party reliable sources the file wont meet WP:NFC Werieth (talk) 07:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

The. KDFO logo that was on there clearly doesn't meet the WP:NFC format. Right below where it says comment, you can tell it's in gallery form, if that's what you are referring to. That logo won't be on that article for sure. (JoeCool950 (talk) 07:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

Let me know if I am right. Like on the KDFO logo that was a previous logo, on the KDFO article, it's what it says on the box below where it says comments?? (JoeCool950 (talk) 07:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

Bengali collage upload

Hi. Thanks for your message. I think you can go ahead and delete the file. Many of those images I used were from Commons, so I suppose it does fail the criteria.--Bazaan (talk) 18:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Modernist violations of WP:NFCC

You are at the limit...Modernist (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Modernist And you need to abide by WP:NFCR outcomes. WP:IDONTLIKEIT isnt a valid reason for reverting. Ill note that since the removal is per a NFCR, the removals

You are over the limit...Modernist (talk) 22:19, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Modernist Please note that WP:3RRNO§5 exempts NFCC violations. Just because you dont like the outcome of a WP:NFCR isnt grounds for you to edit war the files back in. Werieth (talk) 22:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I asked you not to edit war - [1]...Modernist (talk) 23:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

userpage

Was just wondering how to delete a userpage. (JoeCool950 (talk) 23:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

{{db-user}} should work for you. Werieth (talk) 00:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Is it up to me to put it up? (JoeCool950 (talk) 00:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC))

Yes. Werieth (talk) 00:35, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Non-free content

Hi, I notice that two editors have disputed your closure of the discussion there. —rybec 01:55, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Why did you take out Puerto Rican baseball great Roberto Clemente from Puerto Rican? He is like the most famous Puerto Rican baseball player of all time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.201.99.145 (talk) 03:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:CIC General Assemblies.jpg

Hello Werieth. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:CIC General Assemblies.jpg, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 11:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Great Britain Ministry of Defence - Adaptability and partnership issues for the strategic defence review.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Great Britain Ministry of Defence - Adaptability and partnership issues for the strategic defence review.jpeg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 21:14, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Inside Edition

Please let me know why my updates for Inside Edition page are being removed? I'm the Senior Publicist for the newsmagazine. Thanks. (Irene Rogers (talk) 21:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC))Irene Rogers

You have a major conflict of interest issue here, you should not be editing that article. Besides that, what you are posting is a copyright violation as you are copying text from your website. Werieth (talk) 21:25, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Free images

What if another, undoubtly free image of the coat of arms was to be uploaded to Wikipedia? Would you accept that in the gallery? Arms Jones (talk) 02:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

userpage

I might want my userpage deleted maybe.... (JoeCool950 (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2014 (UTC))

North Texas

It's an official logo that meets non-free standards and I just updated the rationale. I will be requesting it be locked because you clearly have your head rammed up your ass. It adheres to #14. The UNT word mark is not athletics and the North Texas word mark is no longer used. The flying eagle is required in all athletics branding. I know this BECAUSE I WORK IN THE DEPARTMENT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.200.199 (talk) 14:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Ill ignore the personal attack, but was that hard to comply with WP:NFCC and not use a copyrighted logo? Werieth (talk) 14:56, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

PTC Template

Hey I understand the fair use for non-free logos, but the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission is a state-run agency, not a private corporation. Therefore, the logo for the PTC falls into the public domain and therefore has unlimited free use, since logos n'at for governmental agencies automatically go into the public domain. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Thanks! Jgera5 (talk) 21:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

@Jgera5: Please cite a source stating that Pennsylvania government material is released under a PD license. United States government is PD but that does not apply to state and local governments. Werieth (talk) 21:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Given that their website states © 2014 The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission the file is non-free. Werieth (talk) 21:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Final warning

The next time you interfere with my private sandbox I will request that you be blocked for repeated intrusion of other users. Graemp (talk) 22:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Graemp And that will get you nowhere, you do not own your sandbox. Violations of WP:NFCC#9 will be removed, that issue is non-negotiable. Werieth (talk) 22:33, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Photo license

Could you please consider reinstating thumb|Wellington Mounted Rifles Hotchkiss gun and crew at ‪User:RoslynSKP/Allenby's preparations for maneuver warfare‬ as this photo is not WP:NFCC#9 but out of copyright. The whole of the source, The New Zealanders in Sinai and Palestine Volume III Official History New Zealand's Effort in the Great War is available on the web here [2], so it may be the license needs to be corrected. --Rskp (talk) 00:52, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Given that it is PD-1923 Ive changed the license, feel free to reinstate the image. Werieth (talk) 00:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

File:WKRC.png

Hi, you deleted this image back in October as an unused fair use image. In fact, it's a public domain image (just a simple wordmark). The file was tagged with {{PD-textlogo}} at the time, but I had mistakenly kept the {{Non-free use rationale logo}} on that page. I realize that deleting invalid fair use images must be a time-consuming process, so the deletion was completely understandable, but I wanted to alert you to the possibility that some perfectly valid images may be falling through the cracks due to mistakes like the one I made. Thank you for your attention to this matter. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 07:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia.

Hello. You have a new message at Ɱ's talk page.--ɱ (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia.

Hello. You have a new message at Ɱ's talk page.--ɱ (talk) 19:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC) Hello. You have a new message at Ɱ's talk page.--ɱ (talk) 19:24, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

"Galatasaray High School Seal" image uploaded by mistake

Hello Werieth! I have noticed your Orphaned Tag in Galatasaray High School Seal page and realized that I meant to upload the said image in Turkish Wikipedia but instead uploaded it in English Wikipedia, by mistake. Thanks for noticing it! Is there anything I can do to fix it or shall I just let it be deleted automatically by the system? --WikiBronze (talk) 19:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Dont worry about it, after 7 days it will be deleted. Werieth (talk) 19:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Image of Hosea Williams tagged by you as 'orphan image'

You recently tagged File:Hosea Williams (screen capture) nps.gov Martin Luther King Jr. National Historic Site website.jpg‎ as an orphaned image. This image is used as the identifying image of Williams in the biographical article Hosea Williams. Hosea Williams died in 2000. The image is of low resolution, the minimum necessary to identify the subject. As the image is NOT an orphan, there is no rationale for the 'orphan image' tag; I removed the tag. - Neonorange (talk) 18:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Neonorange If you take a closer look there are two files File:Hosea Williams delivering a speech (capture from US gov National Parks Service "International Civil Rights Walk of Fame" web site.jpg and File:Hosea Williams (screen capture) nps.gov Martin Luther King Jr. National Historic Site website.jpg The first file is the one being used in the article, the second is not in the article and is the one that I tagged as an orphan as it is not being used anywhere. Werieth (talk) 19:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation; evidently I uploaded the file twice, with the only difference in the file name being a paren. But why did the tag appear on the article? And can I just delete the duplicate image myself (being sure to delete the orphan instance)? - Neonorange (talk) 19:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I never edited Hosea Williams I think you must have seen it on your watchlist where the notice was displayed on the file description page. Werieth (talk) 19:17, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for popping that out of the stack. So, can I just remove the image copy that is an orphan, being sure to remove the correct file? - Neonorange (talk) 19:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Its already been tagged by a third user as a redundant file, and deleted by a fourth admin :) so no need to do anything else. Werieth (talk) 19:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow-up. - Neonorange (talk) 20:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

What are you talking about?

I have not uploaded any pictures. I have just linked up an article with a picture already present on Wikipedia under fair use policy. If you have a problem with that, first completely delete the picture. Stop the reversions. --99.244.158.43 (talk) 19:45, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Where it is written that it is "non-free"? If it is non-free, how come the image in on Wikipedia. You are committing vandalism and you will be blocked if you continue to delete stuff from Wikipedia. --99.244.158.43 (talk) 20:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia host a large number of non-free files ~500,000 files to give you an idea. Werieth (talk) 20:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Still it can be used under fair use policy. See the purpose of use: "The image is used to identify the organization Hezbollah, a subject of public interest. The significance of the logo is to help the reader identify the organization, assure the readers that they have reached the right article containing critical commentary about the organization, and illustrate the organization's intended branding message in a way that words alone could not convey." And "no free equivalent": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content --99.244.158.43 (talk) 20:13, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

@99.244.158.43: We dont have a fair use policy. Our policy on non-free media WP:NFCC is far more strict than fair use law. Usage as a flag icon never meets WP:NFCC. Werieth (talk) 20:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

A discussion has been started on your conduct here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Help_on_who_decides_.22fair_use.22_and_the_.22no_equivalent.22_policy_for_pictures_on_Wikipedia.3F --99.244.158.43 (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to First Sea Lord may have broken the syntax by modifying 6 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:19, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Clawfinger discography

Hi! You have deleted our images from Clawfinger discography. It is OK to incorporate singles images to the articles about respective albums? Such as "Do What I Say" infobox with the image to include into Use Your Brain?

Thanks Lamro (talk) 20:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

No. Album images belong on album pages if the album is notable, If the single is notable you can use the single cover on the article about the single. Otherwise you cannot use the images. Werieth (talk) 20:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Images in Pakistan

The image used does not violate non-free image policy, I am placing it back while we discuss and come to a conclusion whether it violates non-free usage policy or not.

P.S. You folks really like to slap warnings on newcomers, I don't think it is the best of the ways to start a conversation. Sajjad Altaf (talk) 18:07, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

See your talk page, but yes the usage violates WP:NFCC#10c Werieth (talk) 18:14, 31 January 2014 (UTC)