User talk:84.125.58.79

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please note that the Bill Sienkiewicz photo appears to have been validly released under the GFDL. If you are the copyright holder of this image, please feel free to contact info-en-c@wikimedia.org and this can be sorted out, but please do not remove the tag until your identity and copyright status can be verified.


Tenebrae removed the credit, and I said no credit = no photo (other artists have the photo with credits, why is my name so annoying for Tenebrae?), I don't want to be editing all day the wikipedia page, so I retire my pic from wikipedia and another person can upload other pic knowing that he will not be credited. Please don't put again the pic, I'VE DELETED MY PERMISSION. Tenebrae deleted too a very good list of my Sienkiewicz stuff (I put 95% of stuff, the rest of people added more, the "normal" wikipedia way) He deleted it, saying that it's a checklist ¿¿?? and nobody reverted it, I must reverted it, It's a good list, so good that the official Sienkiewicz Web put in his bio. After Midnight deleted all the pictures that I uploaded, I passed a lot of hours doing the list and scanning pics for nothing, I don't want to be losing my time with this anymore. I'm so tired to work for nothing. I don't want the pic is here without my credit, Why is it so hard to understand it?. When I uploaded it I didn't logged in, so how I can delete the picture?

The picture is not being hosted because you gave your permission to Wikipedia to use it, but is being hosted because you agreed to license the picture under the GFDL - a free license that cannot be revoked.
Now, that said, I'm more than happy to look at the picture uploading issue - what images of yours were deleted by After Midnight? And where do you want the credit - on the article, in the caption? Or on the page for the image? Your name does, I believe, appear on the page for the image. And the norm is not to have attribution in the caption itself unless the photographer is particularly significant to understanding the content of the image. Photo credits are generally obtained by clicking on the image, where credit was given to you. Phil Sandifer 14:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
This user created had created a hagiographic, non-encyclopedic fan site with nearly a dozen images, most of them decorative, and virtually none of them, as I recall, with FURs. Another editor, After Midnight, removed image tags for images that had been speedily deleted.--Tenebrae 18:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Ah. Well, fair enough - unless those images are, like the Sienkiewicz photo, released under the GFDL, there's not a lot we can do with them. If you're willing to license them, we're happy to and indeed eager to host them all. Phil Sandifer 18:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
"virtually none of them, as I recall, with FURs".... I'm Spaniard and I don't know what you mean, if "FUR" is the tags, the pictures have all the tags needed, the administrators told me everything about it.
"most of them decorative".... the actual pictures are the uglies, why don't let the most decoratives? 5 images is not nearly a dozen!!!
"images that had been speedily deleted".... my pictures were in wikipedia more than 2 years, why are they removed now?
Tenebrae, Why did you removed the Work-lists? I don't read your reasons.
"If you're willing to license them", I'm not going to move a finger for wikipedia, I'm very tired about it. Anybody can remove the work that you make altruistic in weeks, and and on top of all that anyone tries to insult me.
A FUR is a fair use rationale - basically, for every image that isn't under a free license we need a specific justification for why it is indispensable for the article that it's in, and why it could not possibly be replaced by a free image (free, in this case, meaning "free to be reused by other people for other purposes without them having to pay"). Phil Sandifer 15:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)