Misplaced Pages

It's okay for them to only have the "coat of arms" tag because I haven't gotten around to objecting yet. There's a backlog of about four thousand images that use only the "coat of arms" tag, and since I get about one complaint for every ten images, I'm in no particular hurry. --Carnildo 17:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Nanking Massacre

Just thought I should let you know that some very stubborn people on the page have put the pictures back in that Orphanbot removed, even after I rved to its edit. So they will have to be removed again - not sure if you need to do that manually or something the second time. Cheers, John Smith's 18:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The bot's quite capable of running a slow-motion edit war. I've yet to find someone who can out-stubborn it. --Carnildo 19:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Image source

{{subst:http://mrs-dibny.livejournal.com%7CImage:Sue Dibny.jpg}} T-man, the wise 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC) The image is from a panel of Identity Crisis, a limited series comic book. Why did I got the bot message? what did I do wrong? I thought I choosed the right lisence--T-man, the wise 02:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Copyright tag

I keep trying to add a GFDL self made tag to Image:Male replace.PNG but I can’t seem to do it. Could you please do this for me. Thanks.

One other thing: I'm trying to make new male/female (or boy/girl) userboxes. I can't seem to get them to display properly on the userbox page. Do you know what needs to be done?

Userboxes: Template:User girl Template:User boy Miller 13:31, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

"No source" unreasonable

The image Image:FF5_trans_compare.png got tagged with "no source" by your bot. However, it is a video game screenshot and thus the source is obvious. I have added source information since then, but is there no way for it to check that there doesn't have to be a source, depending on its placement? Actually, now that I'm writing this, I realize that this is likely impossible. In any case, it isn't necessary to add "no source" to such images. Just something that I wanted to let you know in case it helps you any. —msikma <user_talk:msikma> 16:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the source for video game screenshots is not obvious, except in certain rare cases such as shots of the title screen. Just from looking at that one, I wouldn't be able to tell more than that it was from a mid-90s computer game -- or maybe a GameBoy Color game. --Carnildo 03:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Nobody wants your bot killed anymore...

Micoolio101 (the leader) has left Misplaced Pages. M. Burmy has been blocked by an admin.

I'll check and see if any more popup, OK? Tom Danson 19:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot User Page

Hi, I noticed that OrphanBot has a statement that says

Administrators: if this bot is malfunctioning or causing harm, please block it.

I wanted to put this out there, but have you considered adding a http://en.wikipedia.org/Template:Emergency-bot-shutoff ?

If OrphanBot's statement is the same as the emergency bot shutoff button, have you considered adding your bot to the list of bots with emergency shutoff? Guroadrunner 06:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Issues with OrphanBot listed on Bots Talk Page

Also, you may want to look at Wikipedia_talk:Bots because there are some issues with the implementation of OrphanBot. Guroadrunner 06:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

FairuseBot

Your bot removed Image:LisaFVogue.jpg from three pages based on their being dispute. I have tried to add reasoning for the use on the image page, have entered into discussion showing that the cover is discussed and pertinate to each of the articles and there has never been an adminstrative decision made on this image. Why then has it been removed before the issue is resolved? I believe that the image meets the fairuse standard for these articles. To remove this lessens these articles, in my opinion. Thanks. Doc ♬ talk 10:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Same here, for Alessandra Mussolini, an excellent Fair Use rationale was provided at Image:Alessandra_Mussolini_Playboy_IT_Cover.jpg, that the bot ignored. AnonEMouse 12:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

In both cases, the image is still listed as fair-use-disputed. --Yamla 13:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Quite so. Unlike WP:PROD where you are allowed to just remove the tag, or WP:AFD, where there is a real time limit, and someone judges consensus, there doesn't seem to be any formal way of resolving this kind of dispute. The bot shouldn't just remove disputed images after a time, that way it is making a decision that the disputer is always right. AnonEMouse 21:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

My concern as well. There has been no resolution, several persons that I've heard from agree with it being fairuse, one person in particular still does not agree. I have no problem with accepting some sort of consensus, once that has been reached, but in this case it hasn't. Doc ♬ talk 21:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Add orfud tag

When removing images from pages because their fair-use status is disputed, could you also add the {{orfud}} tag to the image page? That would help a great deal, I think. If you respond to this, please do so on my talk page or leave a short note on my talk page indicating that you have responded here. Thanks. --Yamla 13:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll have FairuseBot do that starting the next time it runs. It used to be that Gmaxwell's Roomba would handle the tagging, so FairuseBot didn't need to. --Carnildo 03:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Help with Image:Ncurve2.gif

As I noted on my talk page, I'm not sure what the copyright is on this image. Before you delete the image, would you have the time to help me figure it out? Chris53516 13:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way, if we can't figure out what the copyright is, it's no big deal. I can replicate the idea on my own. It would simply save time to do it this way. Chris53516 13:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey! I requested some help, do you mind? Before you go about deleting the graphic? I don't take well to being ignored. Chris53516 13:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Your bot is not working properly. The image I uploaded is NOT even 7 days old yet. I uploaded it Monday, and your bot removed the graphics already! What's the deal? And you won't help out, either! Give me a break! You should take responsibility for your edits! Chris53516 14:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Quote from the copyright template:

The individual who uploaded this work found it on an unconfirmed website. An experienced editor should help the uploader determine the status of this work, and help the uploader understand the process for picking the correct license in the future.

I'm asking for your help. I can't figure out if a public school is considered part of the government, and thus all that it does is open to the public or not. There is no tag that fits this graphic. It's from a report a school published on their webpage about student achievement. Why don't you help instead of just deleting it? Chris53516 14:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

If you want to actually respond to my requests, don't do it here. I'm not going to waste my time waiting for you to respond, so I'm taking you off of my watchlist. If you decide to finally respond, go to my talk page or better yet the page for the image. Chris53516 13:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for taking so long to respond; I've been quite busy this past week. To put it simply, it's not clear that the image is legally usable on Misplaced Pages, so it's best if you make a free-license replacement. There's nothing special about public schools that makes their images freely-usable; it's only the United States Federal Government that makes all its images freely usable.

The purpose of the {{somewebsite}} template is as a placeholder while you ask for help. When the bot notified you about the image, it linked to Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions, which is the best place to ask for help: there are at least a dozen people watching that page. --Carnildo 04:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

{{untagged}}

Shouldn't this just redirect to {{no license}}, which actually lists the images for speedy deletion? ed g2s • talk 18:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe not, but it should only be used for the case when the license information is in a non-standard form. It should recommend {{no license}} when there is no license info at all, don't you think? ed g2s • talk 18:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The tag is applied almost exclusively by OrphanBot, and the bot can't tell the difference between license information in a non-standard format and no license information at all. If there's a completely empty image description page, OrphanBot uses the {{no info}} tag. --Carnildo 20:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

photos

I took the photo of Elaine Zanutto with my own camera; I own it ...what did I call it EZpic.jpg or some such...I can use it; I took the picture myself. pic of Dudley is mine, too. also on Roberta Wenocur article: I took her photo too. I can indeed use my own digital photos! What is your problem? MathStatWoman 21:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

More on these photos: I own these photos. If you delete them, you make Misplaced Pages less useful, incomplete, and exercise so much control that people laugh at Misplaced Pages's usefulness. MathStatWoman 21:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

We need to specify the copyright status of the photo that is put on Misplaced Pages so Misplaced Pages doesn't get sued for copyright infringement. If you own the photos, you should have specified what kind of copyright status they had when you uploaded the photos (i.e., that you own them and it's okay for Misplaced Pages to use it). Please read this article: Misplaced Pages:Copyrights. Furthermore, there is no need to be so angry about it. Assume good faith of other editors. Heck, I got this notice too. At least you know what the copyright status of your picture is--I have no idea. Chris53516 21:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use

I’m sick of this stupid f’ing bot! There is a fair use rationale on this image: Image:Phycobilisome structure.jpg! Why does the bot say there isn’t?

I have removed the tag now. Please ensure that it isn’t taggaed again. Thank YouMiller 21:40, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Bot unlinked image tagged "NoRightsReserved"

Your 'bot examined Image:Israel barrier zigzag.jpg, which is properly tagged with a {{NoRightsReserved}} tag (a valid tag according to Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags), incorrectly tagged it as lacking copyright information, and then damaged three articles by altering links to the image. Please undo the damage. Thanks. --John Nagle 06:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot did not apply the {{no license}} tag to that image, 69.196.128.174 did, and I believe he was right to do so: permission to use an image on Misplaced Pages is almost the exact opposite of "no rights reserved".

As for the general case of images tagged with bot "no license" and a copyright tag, if someone doesn't believe that a given copyright tag is correct, it's common practice to add a {{no license}} tag and a statement of why the person doesn't feel the existing tag is correct, which was done in this case. Because of this, OrphanBot considers a tag of {{no license}} to be more authoritative than any copyright tag. --Carnildo 06:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Stop touching my images and read

Read the following dicussion with an admin about another image from the same source (Fars News Agency). ArmanJan 11:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

El C doesn't have a strong grasp of Misplaced Pages's fair-use policy. In general, just because the source website acknowleges the existance of fair use doesn't mean that any particular use of their material is fair use. --Carnildo 20:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:OldOS

Could you add this to orphanbot's recognised tags? I've been through OS map's copyright stuff with a toothpick and then phoned them up and asked them about expiry dates.Geni 14:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. --Carnildo 20:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Irish Meusel

I put in the URL for you. You have to do a search to find the image. Never been to spain 21:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I found the image, and I fixed up the image description page to include the proper source information. For images from the Library of Congress website, the important thing to include is the call number, which makes it possible to find the image no matter what changes they make to the site. --Carnildo 23:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Reverted NSD on Image:IMG_3006_crop.jpg

Greetings Carnildo, some friend named "Claire K." doesn't qualify as a source now does it? (→Netscott) 03:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

If you haven't already, please see these WP:ANI threads concerning this image. Thanks. (→Netscott) 04:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Rome-dot

I uploaded a new version of Image:Rome dot.png, highlighting Italy. OrphanBot then told me it had no source information. I have reverted to the previous version. But I originally saw that it was GFDL, and that I could modify it. So I did. What's happening? --Thelb 09:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The {{GFDL}} tag only specifies the copyright status, not the source. In general, GFDL images need sufficient source information that the GFDL status can be verified. In this case, the image was generated either by User:Lupin or his bot, so the correct tag would be {{GFDL-self}}, which provides both source and copyright status. --Carnildo 04:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Requesting Help On an Image "License"

Hello, I was actually hoping a Wiki admin would contact me about the Image:Hanseinstein.jpg I uploaded. I wasn't sure how to classify the image. Basically Hans Einstein was a UC Berekely professor that worked on Northern California water issues long before I was born. At some point in the 1950s, somebody took a photo of him working on one of the earliest models (an analog model) of the Bay estuary. The photograph ended up in the hands of the engineers working for the State of California at some point. While the photograph is now the property of the state and includes a caption on the back of who and what is on the photo, we still don't know *who* took the photo ... chances extremely are the photographer has since retired, but the photo was given to somebody else here who most certainly retired with the intent being to show other people that an Einstein worked on water related issues here.  :) I'm hoping that perhaps that since this photo has been passed down from engineer to engineer in a group that works on similar work, that it can be granted an acception even though the photographer is unknown. I've asked around and nobody knows who took the photo. MCalamari 17:18, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

If you can't find out who the photographer is, then the minimum you need to find out is if the image is copyrighted (if it's from the 1950s, there's a good chance that it isn't), and if it is, who owns the copyright to it. --Carnildo 04:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:BRFA

Hey, was your comment on BRFA approving my bot for running? I've misinterpretted comments on the page before, and just wanted to be sure. Regards, alphaChimp 20:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Another OrphanBot request

Hey. Sorry to ask, but is OrphanBot the right tool for this job? Jkelly 21:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:No copyright holder

I noticed that OrphanBot added this template to Image:Taxi1.jpg. I have a question and a bug report.

Q. Why does it use this template when we already have {{subst:nsd}} which is equivalent?

B. "Unless this information is added to this page, the image will be deleted on (4 August 2006). Remove this tag when you provide the information." (4 August) is, in this case, the date the image was tagged. It should be 11 August, i.e. one week later.

Stifle (talk) 22:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I've seen a lot of confusion over Misplaced Pages's copyright policy. Some of it stems from the complexity of the existing {{no source}} and {{no license}} templates -- what, exactly, is {{no source}} asking for? -- so I'm trying out templates that are short, simple, and to the point. --Carnildo 23:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I like it a lot. If it works-out, I'd love to see this text replace {{no source}}'s. ×Meegs 03:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

So far so good. I would support this replacement. Stifle (talk) 00:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Bot

Your bot sent me a message claiming Image:ESA-members-map.png doesn't have licence info. This is the image page before the bots edits. May be a bug, as I'd say that's pretty clear licence info. Cheers, +Hexagon1 02:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I missed the bot is asking for the creator, not the licence. Wouldn't the users be listed at "file history"? +Hexagon1 02:22, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Russians.jpg

Some smart guy put a double license on the image, Stamps and Sovietpd. I have removed the Stamps license. The image is a PD not a fair use, please tell the orphanbot to stop removing it from the articles abakharev 05:02, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Prabhupada_stamp.jpg

Hi, Carnildo.

I see your bot deleted this image. I understand that this has to do with copyright concerns, and I understand why these are important.

I've reviewed the comments on the Administrators' Noticeboard about fair use of stamps.

In the article A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, our intention was to use the stamp not to provide a mere biographical decoration but to illustrate the fact that the subject of the article has in fact been honored by the Indian government.

The assertion that the government honored him needed verification (this came up on the article's Talk page), and the stamp visually provides it.

And so I believe that what we have here is fair use.

Accordingly, I have restored the image, and added copy to the article to give context, thereby providing further justification for fair use.

I hope this is in line with Misplaced Pages policy. If not, I'd be grateful if you'd get in touch with me.

Thanks very much.

Respectfully, O Govinda 05:16, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Archvile.PNG

OrphanBot's done it again. I simply uploaded an optimised version of the image.--Drat (Talk) 07:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't happen again. I've fixed OrphanBot to understand the British spelling of "optimized". :-) --Carnildo 08:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Catman Cohen photo and subsequent reinstatement

Att: Carnildo:

This is addressed to whomever happens to be removing the "Catman Cohen in silhouette" photo from this Misplaced Pages listing.

The source of the photo is as follows:

It was provided to Misplaced Pages by Keevay Music (BMI), along with the requisite source document at the time photo was uploaded originally. The photo is owned by Keevay Music (BMI), copyright 2005. The original photo was shot by cinematographer, Oliver Theess, residing in Los Angeles, acting as an independent contractor hired by Keevay Music.

{{No rights reserved}}

The very same silhouette image appears in Catman Cohen's one and only live performance video (shot by director William Phelps, acting as an independent contractor for Keevay Music) and the very same silhouette image has been provided to countless websites. The silhouette image is the only official photo of Catman Cohen and, having been placed all over the internet, it is de facto in the public domain now.

Hope this clarifies matters for you, thanks.

24.126.193.239 09:36, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

For your information.

OrphanBot (and FairuseBot) seem to be creating more trouble than they are worth. I have filed a complaint with Misplaced Pages administrators. Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#OrphanBot_too_restrictive.2C_stirring_up_trouble Guroadrunner 10:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Question about an image...

Hello, Carnildo. I just wanted to ask what copyright tag I should put on my image (Image:USofRS.JPG). I did put an "Unsure Which Copyright Tag to Choose" one, where it says I'd get help from someone to choose what tag I'd put, but so far, It's been two days, and all the messages I got concerning the image were from OrphanBot, stating that there's a problem with the image, since there's no copyright. Can you help me, if you're not to busy? Cheers! The Runescape Junkie 22:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The "unsure" tag is meant as a placeholder while you ask for help. There are too many images tagged with it for us to go around actively looking for them.

If the map were made the traditional way, by stitching together hundreds of shots of the minimap, the correct tag would be {{game-screenshot}}. I'm not sure what software Andrew uses for the official maps, but it's probably not the standard client. The best thing to do would be to tag it as {{fair use in|Runescape}}, then add an explanation as to why it meets the requirements at Misplaced Pages:Fair use criteria.

Are you sure you've got the boundaries correct, though? When I was making the first map of Falador, Edgeville, the Barbarian Village, and Drayor were considered part of Varrock, and I clearly recall the boundary of the Wilderness running straight east-west. It's been a while since I've played, though. --Carnildo 04:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

You said:

When I was making the first map of Falador, Edgeville, the Barbarian Village, and Drayor were considered part of Varrock, and I clearly recall the boundary of the Wilderness running straight east-west. It's been a while since I've played, though.

I reply:

Well, I didn't want make boundaries how they should be, I wanted to make them how I'd make them if I was—err...president—of RS. But I'm not sure what you mean about the boundary of the Wilderness running straight east-west, though. I know you're busy, so thanks for giving me a more thorough answer than OrphanBot did. Cheers! The Runescape Junkie 17:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Brandonjaymclaren.jpg

I found this image on the IMDb. It was his actor photo.

Spaceship Earth image

"No reason to use a non-free image when a free one is available"

There is a reason I put it there, because I thought it was weird to have the same picture twice in one article, and it is perfectly fine to use one image per article from a television program. Those were my reasons. --blm07 05:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Abu badali's RFA

Hi, Carnildo. I know you're a busy editor, but, I'd like to say that I would be interested in hearing your input on my RFA. As I work mainly with fair use vigilance, I think you may have an insightful opinion on either I would make for an useful Admin. Feel free to express you opinion. I apreciate and respect your work on Misplaced Pages a lot and this would not change after an "oppose" from you. Thanks in advance, --Abu Badali 04:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:ValentinIvanov.jpg

FYI - I undeleted it and provided it with a fair use rationale. Please review if you wish. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/email 19:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

You missed an important point in the rationale: why it's not possible to find or create a free-license replacement for the image. --Carnildo 06:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

About OrphanBot's deletion of the Pee Dee Cyclones logo

I thought sports logos were exempt, because it being a team logo IS a source. I think OrphanBot needs to be shut off for awhile so it can be fixed. Tom Danson 04:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It is sometimes, but not always, the case that the copyright holder for a logo can be determined simply from looking at the logo. OrphanBot can't tell one case from another, so it won't tag logos as unsourced itself, but at the same time, it assumes that any logo that's been tagged by someone else is one where the source isn't self-evident. --Carnildo 07:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Tell me more about this, I'm interested in how OrphanBot discerns things here. --Guroadrunner 05:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The bot's got two modes. In tagging mode, it checks image uploads, and based on what it finds, it tags the image as {{untagged}} (image description page with no templates on it), {{no license}} (image description page with only a deprecated license tag), {{no rationale}} (image has a tag requiring a fair-use rationale, but nothing that looks like it could be a rationale), or {{no source}} (empty image description page, or page with a tag requring a source, but nothing that could be considered a source).

In removal mode, it assumes that any {{no source}} or {{no license}} tag is correct. In certain cases, such as an image with both {{no source}} and {{PD-self}}, it lists the image for my review. --Carnildo 03:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

<< (image has a tag requiring a fair-use rationale, but nothing that looks like it could be a rationale) >>

Does it parse the image summary for a rationale, or does it only seek a "fair-use rationale" tag? I would have an issue with the latter, as Misplaced Pages's methods can catch people out. See the extra steps a user might be caught out with here: . What are your thoughts on users possibly being caught out by this, and would you have any ideas for solutions? --Guroadrunner 11:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The bot checks the image description page for any of about a dozen keywords that would be part of a fair-use rationale. As a result, it accepts a lot of things that aren't valid rationales, and it hasn't rejected anything I would consider valid in several months. --Carnildo 06:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Not talking about all the vasted time users needs to go through to get the image back on page. - Time is money and Wiki ask for donations? My donation is that I uploaded my image that your system took off...

Message for you, sir

This was left on User:OrphanBot:

hi. i didnt put the picture of ascension on this site. but i saw it there yesterday. i graduated from ascension and attended a reunion there a few months ago. i must have 50 pictures of ascension that i took with my camera. so i will see if i can find one and replace the picture you removed. no big deal. joe 19:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

John Ralston Saul image

Hi,

your bot deleted the official image of Dr. John Ralston Saul the former Vice-Regal Consort of Canada on June 17 2006 at 5:19. It was his official portrait taken while he was in office and was (at the time) available free of charge to anyone wanting a copy either by telephone, mailing, or internet download on gg.ca (we had this same problem with his wife Adrienne Clarkson's image). It is essentially a publicity image of Saul publicizing the office of the vice-regal consort (really a fairly useless position). Its definately fair use, far more so than the book-cover currently on the page (although I think that is a much cooler image). Dowew 05:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

just realized it should be tagged {{Canada-politician-photo}}

Apple II images needing deletion

There are several Apple II-related images that need deletion. They all lack proper source information, and they are all tagged as orphans, as they have been replaced by me with free-use alternatives from the Wikimedia Commons.

I am not an admin, So I cannot delete the images myself, otherwise I would.

The ones needing deletion are: Image:Apple IIe middle age.jpg, Image:AppleIIc2.jpg, Image:Apple IIc.jpg, Image:Apple IIGS.jpg, Image:The Apple II.jpg.\

If they haven't got an orphan tag on them, then its because someone already removed it because there are on-going edit wars.

— Wackymacs 08:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Carnildo is not an admin.... RN 17:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh I thought they were, sorry. — Wackymacs 20:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

mandur

why did u delete the picture of Ajmer Mandur from his wiki site? Your bot deleted him. he is a Canadian politician and the image u deleted is used all acorss the internet as his headshot. Please do not delete any more politicans headshots thanks.Ace ventura 21:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The bot removed it because there is no information on where the image is from, and no evidence that the claim of GFDL is correct. --Carnildo 03:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I know you get this a lot

Hi Carnildo, this is about Image:Peelmap-a.png. I think we can safely claim PD for this image, as it was included in the League of Nations document C.495.M.336.1937.VI. (Geneva. November 30 1937) In case you need more details, it's an important image of Palestine Mandate 1937 partition plan. I thought that Crown will give us an additional protection but it seems I miscalulated. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens 07:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, I went ahead and made this claim (and restored the images commented out by the Bot). If you think this is inappropriate, please LMK. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens 08:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

John Lennon Plaque image

Please, I posted the image today, but i forgot put the attributes, and i received the bot message... Can you review that personally... i shotted that foto today. Thanks

I've done it for you. For future reference, you can change the information on the image description page by clicking on the image or any link to it, and selecting "edit this page". --Carnildo 03:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot ZorphDark ZorphDark 16:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Updated stats?

OrphanBot is still showing stats from June 1. I'd like to see just how much more that this bot has dished out in the 72 days since then. Hbdragon88 22:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll be updating the stats on September 1. --Carnildo 06:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Infocaster's images

You posted this on User talk:Infocaster. I found the probable source for Image:Biddutina.jpg - . You may want to go over his other images with Google image search too. Kimchi.sg 09:55, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

If I ever find the time, I will. --Carnildo 06:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Brioschi image

Hi! I've uploaded an image of Francesco Brioschi and I've not specified the type of copyright so the OrphanBot notified me this problem. Now I don't exactly know the license on the image, but since it is a photo of a 19th century mathematician I suppose it is not protected by any copyright. I could reasonably insert that "the author has died more than 100 years ago" but I have not found the name of the author. Otherwise, what kind of license could I insert? Thanks! Bye! Eldar Featel 13:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

If the image was published before 1923, or published anywhere before 1909, then {{PD-US}} works. "Author died more than 100 years ago" is likely the case, but PD-US is easier to determine. --Carnildo 06:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Uploading images

I'm uploading a few images, but I still don't know exactly how to upload without problems.

Note, most images if not all are from sportslogos.net, so if I could get copyright info there I'd greatly appreciate it. Soxrock 23:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

For logos of sports teams, select "logo" from the dropdown menu and put the name of the team it's for and where you got the logo from in the summary box. --Carnildo 07:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

heh heh...

Oops, thanks! — pd_THOR | 03:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Ebiet's photo

Hello. You say that this image has no source. But I have uploaded it from MalayWiki. So, what is the appropriate tag? In IndoWiki, if an image is uploaded from other Misplaced Pages, it's usually given {{dari|ms}} template for example (:ms is a code for MalayWiki). How about in EnglishWiki? --AFP 04:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

On the English Misplaced Pages, you need to track down where the other Misplaced Pages got it from, and put that on the image description page. --Carnildo 07:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

lost uFDEX.jpg

Hi,

With regards to uFDEX.jpg that you deleted, your copyright information is not clear and not EVERYBODY understands your tag system.

Anyhow if it's removed it's removed, not important at all.

But say a product like USB has a USB logo. The USB logo is posted on your website, but this does not mean it's given to the public because according to the USB regulations anybody using their logo on their product has to pay for it, no matter if it's so called "free to use" over the internet. So in fact USB can't release their logo to the public and this is the same for uFDEX too. The uFDEX logo is a registered trademark and not a public property, but this should not stop Wiki nor others to display this logo in digital form on a website or article as long as it's uploaded by it's original source.

So what to do?

In my opinion, there should be an option "I/we created the image and gives Wiki permission to display this on their website" and not realease this to the public.

Not possible, since we must allow our content to be used for both commercial and non-commercial purposes. Kimchi.sg 23:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Fairusebot

What happened to FairuseBot? It hasn't been running for a while. Kimchi.sg 23:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

FairuseBot generates a lot more traffic on my talkpage than OrphanBot, so I only run it when I think I'll have time to deal with it. --Carnildo 07:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding G.B. Jones

Dear Carnildo,

Regarding the image you have removed from G.B. Jones: this image is a single frame taken from the film The Yo-Yo Gang. It had been distributed by the filmmaker (G.B. Jones) and reproduced in various film festival catalogues, fanzines and magazines, and is currently available on-line on at least a couple of websites, the adresses of which can be provided upon request. It is a publicity photo used to promote the film The Yo-Yo Gang. As such, the rights of reproduction of this image can be understood as being much the same as the reproduction of an album cover. If you would be so kind as to reinstate this photo on the G.B. Jones page, that would be much appreciated.

TheEmissary 18:23, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Freezing rain.png

Hi,

Pierre cb 23:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

They may permit reproduction, but that is not the same thing as an any-purpose license. See User:Carnildo/Image FAQ section 1.2. --Carnildo 07:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Two pictures in the article about Josipa Lisac

Hello;

I would like to inquire your help with this page I made about Josipa Lisac, the Croatian singer. About a month ago, I've updated her biography and put 2 more pictures, which your program removed. One of them had the copyright information and the other one didn't, due to my own mistake. Since both of these pictures are used from the official site and with a permission, I would appreciate if you would help me tag them correctly, so they could be put on the page once again. Please send me a feedback. Thank you.

Aries 80 01:40, 16 August 2006

Since the images have been deleted, I can't do anything about it. You should ask at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions: there are a few administrators who watch that page who can undelete the images if needed. --Carnildo 07:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Promotion Picture Deleted From Article About .475 Wildey Magnum

Is it any way to get me back that picture? It was posted with out my knowledege that it diden't have a tag. The right tag should have been promotion material. Please, tell me that it's not gone forever. Because I cant find it again, ANYWHERE! And program that robot to give a warning one the main article page, and not only if you click the picture (wich a basically never did!).....Thankxxxx FreddyFred 00:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The image was deleted for not having source information. Without that, it's not possible to verify the copyright status, and the image can't be used on Misplaced Pages. The bot did notify the uploader, User:ChuckyDarko, and when it removed the image from the article, you still had three days to fix the problems with it before it was deleted. --Carnildo 07:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Two images in the article on Josipa Lisac

Regarding my post above, I have tried to fix the problem. I re-uploaded both pics together with all the necessery information and a tag. They are used with a permission from the official site. I would appreciate if you could check the pictures and let me know if this is all right now or whether some more information is necessary.

Aries 80 16:27, 16 August 2006

Image:Bsu.jpg

An edit left by OrphanBot recently isn't very helpful. Can I suggest that any image uploaded with the {{Don't know}} tag should be marked for human eyes, rather than replying with a bot? In some cases, the answer is going to be, "we can't accept the image, sorry," but that's got to be a case-by-case call, since the user has specifically asked for our help. Telling the user, "you uploaded something using the "Don't know" tag isn't very helpful, since (presumably) they already know that. Perhaps if your bot brought such images to the attention of a larger audience that could help? -Harmil 14:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not practical to have every image checked individually: about a thousand "Don't know" images are uploaded every week, and many of them don't have source information. I'll work on a message telling the uploader where they can go for more information, but ultimately, it's up to the uploader to get the problems fixed. --Carnildo 08:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Bot notifying people

Hi, is the bot supposed notify people about every image they uploaded with problems? I was going through the backlog on Aug 2 of untagged images, and I see this User:Washi uploaded a whole bunch of those, but he got notified only regarding one image. Is that the way it was supposed to be? Renata 00:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I try not to have the bot flood people with messages: before I implemented the rate-limit, people were getting hit with 50+ messages a day. When it's in tagging mode, it'll notify someone no more than once in an hour, no matter how many images they've uploaded in that hour. When it's in removal mode, it'll notify someone no more than once a day, regardless of how many images from that person it's removing. All the messages it uses should tell the person to check any other images they've uploaded. --Carnildo 08:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

re: copyright material

Hey, I have a close relaitonship with the ICJP and I know I am allowed to use their logo (they have sent it to me in order to make my own letterhead ... what should I do to get their permission to you?

Thanks --Dahveed323 22:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC) David

Hi David. Permission for inclusion in Misplaced Pages is not useful because our goal is not to build this web site, but to create an encyclopedia of free content that is useable by anyone, anywhere. Nevertheless, we do make an exception for logos to be used in articles about their organizations. User:Sue Anne has tagged this image appropriately, so it will not be deleted. Take a look at her edit here for future reference. ×Meegs 11:28, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

jam & spoon

I indicated the source and the location of the image —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kyrie eleison (talk • contribs) 2006 August 18.

Image:Ac.jeffery.jpg

Hi, orphan bot sent me a message on this, but it was a pre-existing image that I shramk and re-uploaded. Can you help me better understand the intricacies of fair use? I wanted to speedy tag the thing myself, but it seems important to the article and is probably mis-tagged. Thanks  :) Dlohcierekim 15:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Dlohcierekim. Fair use is an exception to U.S. copyright law that allows the republication of works without permission from their owner. It's defined by four factors that are explained in fair use, and is quite complicated. Misplaced Pages's policy for unfree content reflects both U.S. law and the project's goals as a free content encyclopedia. One problem with this particular image is that it probably does not meet our policy's first criterion (here). Notwithstanding, the reason that you received the message from orphanbot was because you did not provide fair use rationale for the image's use in its articles. If you have any specific questions, please ask them at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. ×Meegs 11:15, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Once you're back

Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_adminship/Carnildo 3

The Uninvited Co., Inc. 22:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

woodlawn river image

hi, this image was sourced from wikimapia, but we were unsure how to license it at the time and didnt get back to adding the license tag, what should we do, (we is myself and a friend who created and update the st john's college, woodlawn article, the school we go to) thanks in advance for your help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Perkins88 (talk • contribs) 2006 August 20.

I assume that you are talking about Image:Wilson River -Woodlawn.JPG. That image was deleted because it did list any information about its copyright holder (who is not wikimapia, either). Do you know what government or corporation created this photo? Many (but not all) satellite photos are made by NASA and are in the public domain. Carnildo is on vacation right now, but we can help you with the issues involved if you leave a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. You can also reach me on my talk page. ×Meegs 10:42, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

this is my own image

Image:54dd.jpg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Highpriestess (talk • contribs) 2006 August 20.

Hello Highpriestess, Carnildo is on vacation. I see that this image's article was deleted after your request on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/United faith ministries. I've deleted the image as well. If you'd like to talk about it further, please leave a message on my talk page or at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. ×Meegs 10:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Canyon Lakes Ranger District Photo Removed

Hello,

I had replaced the photo on this page and used all the proper tagging of the photo. It is a government photo - USDA Forest Service. If there was something else I needed to tag it with, I would like to know that for the future when working with Misplaced Pages.

Thank you.

Image:Atlanticpuffin.JPG -source now added, jimfbleak 12:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

== Anton Corbjin- how to tag? ==

Hi Carnildo,

I have shrunk and reloaded one of his images. Then I got a message from ophanbot. Do we attribute his images some way other than fairuse?

Thanks,  :) Dlohcierekim 12:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Possible mistagging by OrphanBot

OrphanBot recently went through a slew of Formula 1-related images, so I've been double-checking on the ones it has tagged.

I would like to discuss

It is listed as a promotional image from a press kit from Autosport. OrphanBot didn't parse that information in the description, from what I can tell.

How would one go about adding copyright and fair-use information here? Let's discuss.

Additionally, I would like to get what you think regarding this fair-use magazine cover:

Cordially, --Guroadrunner 11:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, probably what would be best would be to add a variant of http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Promotional_images to both. What is your opinion? --Guroadrunner 12:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Zharta2

Get my image back!!! Please I own it you can't just remove it!!!!!!!! You know what This is not a bot it is a BUG a bot won't take YOUR images, only a bug can do that!!!!! Please I need that image you can't just take it!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zharta (talk • contribs)

This has been resolved at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. Jkelly 19:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Possible Overlapping Waldorf Project

Hello,

I have proposed to make a project about Waldorf education because the page is a mess and under constant edit wars. I have proposed it as a project, but don't wish to duplicate efforts- would you prefer that we make this a sub-project of your own project? I can see needing at leat 4 work pages and I already have the support of one administrator and input from one unbiased Wikipedian, plus three others who are willing to work on the project. Will this be OK with you - and I would welcome your unbiased input as well - I am mainly peacekeeping on this. Wonderactivist 15:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot

Hey, Carnildo, is Orphanbot broken? User:Zoe|(talk) 21:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I suspect it's only slightly bent. The edit it made immediately before that was to an image with the unusual title of Image:My.php?image=ikwyd2fl.jpg. I would not be surprised if that screwed up something for that one edit. Other notices seem to be all right. AnonEMouse 21:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot's got minor problems with titles containing characters that have special meanings in HTML or URLs, such as "&", "?", and "=". Most of the time, it does the right thing when dealing with them, and images with those characters don't show up very often, so fixing the last few bugs is very low priority. --Carnildo 19:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA and your work on images.

Thank you for your work. Thank you for orphanbot. I look forward to you regaining adminship so you can help straighten out the mess. Best regards,  :) Dlohcierekim 17:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot

I noticed that your bot, OrphanBot, is removing GFDL images, and tagging them under no source. Just thought I'd let you know. Visit the history of the Ford Taurus page for an example. Karrmann 19:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot's right to do so. The GFDL requires that the author of the image be specified on the image description page; with no author, our use of the image constitutes a copyright violation. Further, since a source isn't specified, it's impossible to tell if the image is really licensed under the GFDL, or if someone put the wrong tag on the image. --Carnildo 19:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

A grammatic technicality, but a bot is an automated, non-human machine, and therefore currently does not have rights in the same sense as humans. -- 71.226.112.183 09:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Alfred Hunt image

Carnildo,

I thought that I had provided the source and copyright information on the image Alfred Hunt 2.jpg.

Since Alfred Hunt is a relative I have inherited this photograph. It is my personal property. I have no knowledge that this photograph has ever been published or granted a copyright.

Your assistance in this matter is appreciated. Kindly keep me informed.

Robert M. Hunt 13:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

In that case, probably the best thing to do is make a note of that fact on the image description page and add the {{PD-self}} tag. --Carnildo 02:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

questionable images

Since you're an expert at tagging copyvio images, you might want to have a look at Cyprus Photo Gallery, as it's nothing but a collection of unsourced images that look like copyvios. The page has been tagged for speedy, and if it's gone by the time you get there, look at the contribs for User:Darthguevara. I'd do it, but I'm not familiar with the process. Akradecki 20:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks like it's been dealt with properly. --Carnildo 02:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Spiderman dubious fair use

You have a lot of experience with dealing with people who insist on violating fair use policy, so would you mind taking a look at these? Spider-Man 3, talk and WP:MCQ. I realise you're busy and all, but that animated poster is really doing my head in... Borisblue 00:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Question in Your RfA

As it appears you are unaware, there has been a question added to your RfA regarding the February wheel war incident. Many users are awaiting your answer. -- tariqabjotu 02:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

it's actually been there for quite some time... I didn't bother coming here sooner because I figured SURELY you must know about it already and why bother... but perhaps you did not. I think addressing it (and using it to address the many concerns raised, for example see Giano's oppose, his discussion on my talk page, Bishonen's oppose and others) would be quite helpful.++Lar: t/c 12:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I just came here to write the same thing that I see the above two have already written. It seems to be pretty important, and may make the difference in the request succeeding. It's pretty clear that without answering the question, the nomination won't succeed. AnonEMouse 14:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I managed to miss seeing it entirely. Normally, I read pages using the history, so I see every change that's been made, but with my RFA, it's been so busy I've just clicked on the "current version" link and checked the tallys. --Carnildo 00:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Joe Glenn's picture

The head and shoulders shot of Joe Glenn, University of Wyoming's head football coach, was removed because of improper copy right information. I obtained the photo from the UW Sports Information Office upon my request.

Please advise as to how I can properly credit the photo.

Jeff Fry

Copyright question on Image:ImpRADM.png

Someone told me that you knew a lot about image copyrights. I was wondering if you could verify and repair if necessary the license tag for Image:ImpRADM.png. Fritz Saalfeld has contested the current copyright status, saying that he does not believe it is a screenshot. He was not sure what tag should be changed to though. I uploaded this image, but I'm not sure if who has the copyright either. The image is a remake of an old JPEG on Misplaced Pages. I believe the older image was a screenshot of an old StarWars computer game. Here's the story. On another old JPEG, User:-cg- took it and made a new image based on it in Photoshop that was really nice looking. It was the same layout, only it was definatley a different picture. The old image was blurry, highly compressed, and small. He made it look sort of 3D-ish. Then a while later, I took that image that -cg- made and rearranged its components to make Image:ImpRADM.png. Who would hold the copyright for this image? Thank you. Jecowa 06:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the correct copyright tag is. It's clearly based on the video game, so it can only be used under a "fair use" claim, but at the same time, it's not a screenshot. Probably the best thing to do is tag it with a generic {{fair use}} tag, then add an explanation as to why it meets the criteria at Misplaced Pages:Fair use criteria. --Carnildo 07:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Jecowa 14:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Images of John Ralston Saul

Hi.

I sent you a message a while back while you were on holiday but you didn't respond to it (its above on this page). OrphanBot deleted an image of Dr. John Ralston Saul called Bigphotojonralstonsaulcc.jpg on 09:52, 7 April 2006.

This was Dr. Saul's official photography from the website of the Governor General of Canada (Saul was Viceregal consort of Canada). The photo was taken by Rideau Hall which is linked to the Department of National Defence of Canada. I know this means it was not Public Domain, however, it was produced with the intention that it be readily available to the general public. It was available in high resolution downloan on www.gg.ca, and was also available for free as a glossy print to anyone who called a 1-800 number or wrote to Rideau Hall (for example if the Royal Canadian Legion wanted a new photo of the Vice-Regal Consort...a really useless role and im sure there weren't many requests).

Since there is no pd alternative, I think it can safely be reuploaded and put on the page as either a promotional photo or as an official canadian politician photo {{Canada-politician-photo}} (although the vice-regal consort, as consort to the head of state is above politics...but Saul openly questioned the Government of Paul Martin so he really wasn't...

Anyway, he was going to speak at my University and I was going to print off that photo for him to sign, but it was gone. And since he and Adrienne Clarkson are no longer in office the photo is not available on gg.ca anymore. If you can't reupload it, can you possible e-mail it to me ?

Thanks Dowew 08:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure you've got the image name correct? OrphanBot's logs don't show it ever having encountered an image with that name. --Carnildo 07:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Marina (TV series) copyvio

I've reviewed to blocks of copyvio from this. You are the handiest expert on copyright I can think of. The bulk of the remainder of the article is from IMDB. My inclination is to blank it and slap on a copyvio sticker. If you can provide me with an alternative to that or rewriting the thing myself, I'll do it. Otherwise, I feel the nest thing is to get rid of it. :) Dlohcierekim 01:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

If there's a version in history that hasn't been copied from somewhere, you can revert to that version. Otherwise, the only thing to do is list it as a copyvio. --Carnildo 02:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks,  :) Dlohcierekim 11:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

John Ralston Saul image

In responce to your post above, yes, the name is correct see ]. Does OrphanBot delete the log after a while or something ? Dowew 20:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot didn't remove the image from that page. It was removed on May 23, 2006 by 69.195.23.55, and deleted on July 13 by Petros471 as an unused fair-use image. You might be confusing this with OrphanBot's removal of Image:Jrs jyt230.jpg on April 7. The image was deleted recently enough that it's probably possible to undelete it; try contacting Petros471. --Carnildo 05:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I have nominated you for adminship.

Do you accept?

You are aware that there is a RFA for Carnildo in progres right now right? I suggest focusing on that, and not launch any new ones untill the current one have at least closed. Launching a new RFA before the last one have even closed is not likely to be well recieved. --Sherool (talk) 13:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Orphanbot suggestion

It seems rather cold to have the first thing that a person may get on their user talk page is an orphanbot message. Is there a way to have orphanbot check to see if the talk page doesn't exist yet, and if it doesn't, then also add a Welcome or Welcomeip template to the page? 12:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

In the past, suggestions for automated welcoming messages have been frowned upon. --Carnildo 21:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am familar with the general consensus against systemwide automated welcome messages (which wouldn't even need a bot since the welcome could easily be added directly to the MediaWiki software). I was only suggesting for the special case where the orphanbot is about to add a warning to a blank talk page, it should also add a welcome to the obvious newbies and point them to the Misplaced Pages rules and guidelines before it gives its warning about violating one of those rules. 15:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a suggested wording? --Carnildo 20:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

For the record of what the current warning is, one example is:

Thanks for uploading Image:Princessdiaries2.jpg. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages: :Misplaced Pages:Image use policy :Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 01:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC) (italics mine)

The only recommendation I would have is to change "This is an automated notice by OrphanBot." to "This is an automated notice by OrphanBot, a robot run by Misplaced Pages administrator Carnildo."

I also would include something in the first sentence saying, "Hello, my name is OrphanBot. Thanks for uploading XX (...)" This accomplishes two things:

• 1) It establishes who is sending the warning.
• 2) It greets the user, who may be a total newbie.

Personally, I felt "biting the newbies" was something OrphanBot unintentionally did, and this may have been the source of some of the aggravation that you end up receiving. Hit me back with what you think.

--Guroadrunner 10:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

In addition, I'd like to say that the new wording released on or around 5 September is much better than the one that was used on 4 September or before. For the record, that was:

Thanks for uploading Image:B60s-Clocking.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Misplaced Pages:Image use policy

Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 11:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC) (italics again mine)

Thank you for making that modification, because I think it is much friendlier than the one that OrphanBot used before.

P.S. - congrats on the adminship.

--Guroadrunner 10:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Help

A little help here. What copyright tag is this picture missing?--The Judge 20:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

If you're referring to Image:B60s-Clocking.jpg, you need to add what television program it's from and who the copyright holder is to the image description page. --Carnildo 20:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

The television show is Easy, but how do I find out the copyright holder? Actually I just realized that's not a screenshot, it's more like a promotional image released for publicity or that sort of thing.--The Judge 20:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Is this good enough?: "Promotional picture of Walter Slazak as the Clock King in Batman".

If you're going to claim it's a promotional image, you need to provide proof that it is indeed from promotional material intended to be distributed widely. Far too many people use the "promotional" claim to mean "I can't be bothered to find out where this is from". --Carnildo 21:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Don'd worry, I'm not one of those. I want to get the sourcing right. From this specific picture I'm learning how to do it, because a well sourced picture makes a well sourced article. I'm mean, articles need sources, so that the readers know the editors are not just talking crazy. If the article has a picture, with nice sourcing, it is quickly placed in context. It starts looking real. So, I need to get this picture right. --The Judge 21:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

This picture is the exact same case as Image:Gorshinriddler.JPG, or Image:Egghead batman.jpg and Image:Jnewmarcat.jpg--The Judge 21:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Sould the tag {{fair use in|)} be placed in all pictures like that??--The Judge 22:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I fix all of those, did I finalle got it right? Did I missed something?--The Judge 06:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

You still need to provide evidence that those are promotional images. Ideally this would be a link to a "press kit" or "promotional images" section of an official website. --Carnildo 06:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Adminship

Congratulations, you're an admin again. Based on your continued good work, the large amounts of support you got, and extenuating circumstances a group of bureacrats has decided to promote you for two months with review by the arbcom after that. Keep up the good work, take into account the opposition to the extent that you can improve and can use it to help the project. - Taxman 04:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Congrats. I think the bureaucrats have made the right decision!-gadfium 04:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Well deserved. User:Zscout370 04:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

congrats! alphaChimp 04:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Use it well. Congrats. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 05:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Congrats. Please, do not fail us. -- ReyBrujo 05:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Don't worry, I'm not going to fly off the handle and block everyone who opposed me or anything like that. --Carnildo 06:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, congrats :D. Now, if you are interested in some "light warmup" we seem to have a 1500+ image backlog developing over at Category:Orphaned fairuse images bring a mop ;) --Sherool (talk) 06:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! :) Bugtrio | Talk 08:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Congrats and good luck. Yanksox 10:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Congrats! The news of you being promoted has made my day. I was a bit concerned that you wouldn't make it with the amount of opposes given, but I'm glad that you got through and there is no doubt that you will do a great job like you did before. Keep up the fantastic work with OrphanBot! :-) DarthVader 12:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations and best of luck.-- danntm _C 13:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Despite opposing in your rfa, I do wish you the best. I don't envy your position, being the subject of such a contentious rfa and outcome can not be pleasant. Regards, MartinRe 13:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Possible mistagging by OrphanBot -- please respond

OrphanBot recently went through a slew of Formula 1-related images, so I've been double-checking on the ones it has tagged.

I would like to discuss

It is listed as a promotional image from a press kit from Autosport. OrphanBot didn't parse that information in the description, from what I can tell.

How would one go about adding copyright and fair-use information here? Let's discuss.

Additionally, I would like to get what you think regarding this fair-use magazine cover:

Cordially, --Guroadrunner 11:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, probably what would be best would be to add a variant of http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Promotional_images to both. What is your opinion? --Guroadrunner 12:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Regards, GURoadrunner

These examples are now moot, as they were deleted. However, one was a magazine cover that had been on Misplaced Pages for yonks that was used under (I believe correct) fair use. --Guroadrunner 10:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)