| Revision as of 15:43, 9 April 2010 edit66.65.110.69 (talk) →Images← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:14, 9 April 2010 edit undoHaeB (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Mass message senders, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers54,276 edits →ImagesNext edit → | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
| ::It is NOT wireds photo. It's distributed by WIkiLeaks itself as a press photo for the advisory board. | ::It is NOT wireds photo. It's distributed by WIkiLeaks itself as a press photo for the advisory board. | ||
| :::No one said it is Wired's photo. The point is: As it is usual on Misplaced Pages and Commons, the fact that a photo had been published elsewhere is seen as prima facie evidence that the uploader did not create it himself, i.e. is not the copyright holder as claimed. (If he is, there are standard procedures to identify oneself for that purpose, see ].) | |||
| :::In any case, I don't see problems with the current photo (]). | |||
| :::Please ] by appending four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). | |||
| :::Regards, ] (]) 16:14, 9 April 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:14, 9 April 2010
 | Biography Stub‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
 | Australia Stub‑class Low‑importance   | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
wikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.wot no article? I'm a bit surprised.....
hmm it is surprising.. I'm not sure if it'd be entirely coincidental though.
<3 Julian Assange
hmmmmm...... Privatemusings (talk) 01:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Does sombody know the pronunciation of Assange? 134.245.5.104 (talk) 17:24, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
- see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4o2ZGk1djTU (5:25). don't know how to transcript it into IPA 62.113.209.26 (talk) 15:12, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- No reference here to Wikileaks! I don't know enough about him to 'be bold' and update, but if anyone does that is one glaring omission. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sulvo (talk • contribs) 06:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Images
people keep reverting the good photos of julian to maximally bad, unrepresentatives ones claiming copyright violations which they are NOT. You can see how bad this is when there are two photos taken at a conference (new media days/copenhagen) within what appears to be seconds of each other, from the same camera, and the one that makes the speaker look dumb is picked, even though BOTH have been uploaded to wikipedia, one called "1" and the other called "2". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.110.69 (talk) 14:34, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- About the Copenhagen photos, you may have a point - I have changed it back from File:Julian Assange 20091117 Copenhagen 2.jpg to File:Julian Assange 20091117 Copenhagen 1.jpg, although I think that both of them are not very good (he is barely recognizable when they are displayed in the article).
- File:Julian assange.jpg, which had been uploaded by User:Groasvans to Commons on 1 April 2010, can be found (in a slightly different edit) in this 2008 Wired article, for example - without any indication there that it is under a free license. It has just been deleted on Commons.
- Regards, HaeB (talk) 14:58, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- It is NOT wireds photo. It's distributed by WIkiLeaks itself as a press photo for the advisory board.
- No one said it is Wired's photo. The point is: As it is usual on Misplaced Pages and Commons, the fact that a photo had been published elsewhere is seen as prima facie evidence that the uploader did not create it himself, i.e. is not the copyright holder as claimed. (If he is, there are standard procedures to identify oneself for that purpose, see Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials.)
- In any case, I don't see problems with the current photo (File:Julian Assange 26C3.jpg).
- Please sign your comments by appending four tildes (~~~~).
- Regards, HaeB (talk) 16:14, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- It is NOT wireds photo. It's distributed by WIkiLeaks itself as a press photo for the advisory board.
