User talk:Elcobbola

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Caution
  • Elcobbola will be out of town 18. June through 25. June and will have limited, if any, availability during that time.
Caution
  • Unless otherwise requested, I will usually respond on this page.
  • If applicable, please include links to the pertinent page(s).
  • I consider WP:DTTR required reading.
Archive
 · Archive 1 (11.2007–01.2008)
 · Archive 2 (02.2008–04.2008)
 · Archive 3 (05.2008–present)

Contents

[edit] Request for Review

Just want to say thanks for all your hard work on FAC; it's definitely been noticed and appreciated by all. I've got another project I'm working on with User:Johntex — a somewhat lengthy article called 2007 Texas Longhorn football team. We're trying to get it ready for FAC, but we're at the point now where we need some outside input to keep working. Seeing that you're probably the best reviewer around in terms of depth, we were wondering if you could take a look at it and judge it as you would an FAC. There's no time rush at all -- it'll be done when it gets done, and I'm not even planning to submit it for FAC until we can get three peer reviews and Johntex is as happy with it as I am. Any help you'd be able to give would be much appreciated. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. I'd be happy to look at it. Counterintuitively, I tend to do things faster when there is no time limit, so hopefully it won't take me too long to get to it (I will be out of town this weekend, however). ЭLСОВВОLД talk 18:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Not a problem. I'm headed up to the North Slope here next week, so I'll be out of touch at times. JKBrooks85 (talk) 09:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Update: I'll be flying to the east coast next weekend and it's my intent to make reviewing this my activity for the flight. Apologies, as always, for my dilatory pace. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 00:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dispatch image question

Hey, ec; I need help in getting to the bottom of this, as Tony often helps with images for the Dispatch. Image:FA main page (excerpt).png was used in the April 7 Dispatch. It was removed and tagged with no notification to Tony. First, why isn't there notification to the uploader; second, what did Tony do wrong; and third, is there a way to tag this image so it can be used? There are similar images in other Dispatches. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

  1. That may be a question for ImageBacklogBot and/or STBotI's owner(s), but I suspect I know the answer: given that a bot has the ability to tag en masse, the notification may be disabled to avoid instances, for example, where the bot would "mechanically" template 20 times a user who had uploaded 20 problematic images (I trust you saw JBMurray's talk page and concerned reaction to getting rapid/multiple image warning templates - from a human user, nonetheless).
  2. Tony didn't really do anything wrong (directly regarding the reason for its removal, anyway): ImageBacklogBot removes fair use images that are being used outside of mainspace (Signpost is in Wikipedia space). STBotI tags fair use images not being actively used in an article (NFCC#7). Once the first bot struck, the image was fair game for the latter.
  3. The way to avoid the fair use nonsense all together is to crop out the Wikipedia logo (the source of the problem) and tag with {{Wikipedia-screenshot}}. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 12:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Unsure of the difference between WP space and mainspace. Isn't the second one still usable? What is the big deal about using the WP icon on WP? (How precious.) TONY (talk) 13:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Mainspace is the encyclopedia proper and WP space (a/k/a project space) is information about WP and/or its sister projects. Fair use in WP space is explicitly disallowed (albeit with somewhat vague explanation); ultimately, I suppose the idea is that fair use images should never really be needed to convey understanding of free/GFDL projects (NFCC#9 is, in that sense, somewhat redundant to NFCC#8.) You're preaching to the choir on the last bit, though. Restricting use of the WP logo on WP is perhaps needed for consistency, but it does seem to spit in the face of common sense. Bots, unfortunately, can't IAR. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 14:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images on Cranmer article

I deleted the images that you named. --RelHistBuff (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Me again, image question

The editor who wrote this FA is no longer around; can you translate this edit summary for me? Is there a way to add back that image ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

"Bust a Cc-by-nc-sa-2.0 image" translates to "remove an image with a license that does not permit commercial usage" (the NC means non-commercial, which is verboten per WP:IUP, WP:TAG and Jimbo). Unless the image has since been re-licensed by the copyright holder, WP can't use it. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 23:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
you know ... some of these image types can be really jerky. Besides shorthand the average person can't decipher, just like the previous situation, no notification, now the image is gone, and since I'm not an admin, I can't verify who took the picture so I can contact that person. Oh, well; not enough hours in a day to track it all down. But you need to become an admin, Elcobbola. (And Laser brain has left the building after the disgusting debacle and display of bad faith today at Talk:Elderly Instruments. There are some days when it would have been better not to log on here.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I take it back: there is a notification at User talk:Enano275. I guess I'd best watch his talk page for any more, since he's also left the building. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Heh. This was the original information and licensing: El Hatillo Municipality as seen from El Calvario. Created by Rafa M. {{cc-by-sa-2.0}}. HTH. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 00:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, Jb; I tracked it back somewhat, and it does look like Enanito goofed. Oh, well, long day. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Jb, go to the bottom of the Flickr page; the crossed out dollar sign is a bad thing. ;) The {{cc-by-sa-2.0}} license was wrong (the deletion was actually correct). This is really common; people see the CC and a 2.0 and slap on a license that looks similar. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 00:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Yup, I see. I was just using my newfound awesome powers (heh) to find the source in case SandyG wanted to follow up with the person who originally uploaded to Flickr. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 00:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I certainly agree that the esoteric shorthand falls well short of being considerate of other editors. I'm indeed finding myself somewhat distressed after watching from afar the events surrounding Elderly Instruments (ANI, article talk, etc.) It's a lovely article and Laser is entirely honorable, competent, and an invaluable asset to the project. To see them both attacked with ignorance of policy and assumptions of bad faith is (and I find myself saying this word all too often on Wiki) disheartening. The admin thing ... I just don't know. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 00:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Very disheartening. I do fine when I'm attacked; I do less fine when I see good, decent, innocent editors unfairly attacked, particularly by armchair quarterbacks. Ah, the herbal bath beckons. Thanks for the image help (and just for that, it would be helpful if you were an admin :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
As it's the middle of the week, and I'm pretending not to be here, I choose to remain heartened. Enjoy the herbal bath! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 00:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I will: go practice using your new tools on the obvious vandal on my user page :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Vandalism? Please, everyone knows that they are in their 40's! ЭLСОВВОLД talk 00:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Right, watching over Michael Wolff's and Polly Draper's kids takes more out of my day every day than any single article, even Tourette syndrome (which is why I watch over them). Gosh, I'm in trouble: had a full massage and facial with hair and manicure only a few hours ago, and I still need an herbal bath ???? Darn, I expected to come home and find the world was well with Laser and his Instruments. Bah. That kind of bad faith really Bums Me Out. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Is that your connection to TS? I've been resolving bad faith with beer, bananas and Vivaldi - a method that has not exactly caught on this side of the pond. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 01:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict:) C'mon, even a vandal can be right some of the time. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Beer and bananas is not funny; in fact, ec, that is *really* gross !! I take my beer with pretzels, thank you! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
A nice Bohemia with fried plantains, or Hitachino white ale with banana tempura would cure what ales you (but I'll pass on the Vivaldi).--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 01:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Nah, the best cure for what ails me (ales me ? :-) would be to beat up on someone for Laser brain (she said as she looked around the room, let's see, two innocent little dogs, one big adorable dog, one lounging adolescent, and a snoring husband since the Red Sox are trouncing Kansas City ... who do I choose ... ? ) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Lock the husband and a dog in the car truck. See which one is happy to see you when you open it. ;) ЭLСОВВОLД talk 01:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
How am I going to get the big snoring one down the stairs to the car (dogs, no problem) ? Far easier would be to pop him over the head with a frying pan and see if that stops the rumble and cures my foul humor. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Too bad I don't have a SNORINGHSUSBANDBOOK (cf [1]) in my userspace. I might pressure you to contribute.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 01:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Three items: ether rag, wheelbarrow, adolescent assistant. Would make a funnier photo for TFMWNCB, too. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 01:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Pictures of my dogs on the internet? Fat Man, Never !!! Please, think of the consequences. (Where does one buy ether? Where does one buy ether at night? ) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Socks stuffed in his mouth might work too, they might shut him up. (I feel for you on the loud snoring, first hubby snored so bad you could hear him downstairs in our house. It took me almost a year to get used to sleeping without that sound after he died.) Ealdgyth - Talk 02:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm. "Socks stuffed in his mouth....he died." Sorry for vivid imagination. You did say "pile on." Sorry again for vivid imagination. You can delete this comment if totally tasteless and harsh. Sorry. Anyway, there is an "increased susceptibility to snoring as age increases", so the best way to deal with snoring is to not let age increase.  :-)Ferrylodge (talk) 04:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
As we say in Spanish, when they reach 50, you're supposed to trade them for two 25-year-olds. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Why do I have a sudden urge to watch Y tu mamá también? ЭLСОВВОLД talk 12:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Do I get to pick the 25 year olds? Mine is only 40, can I trade him in on two 20 year olds? I like this plan....Ealdgyth - Talk 14:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Urgents

Maintain User:Deckiller/FAC urgents if you want, but it was only frustrating me because it was one more thing to keep up with, and I had no sense it was attracting reviewers to the articles that most needed them. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll pick it up. It'll be a net positive even if we just get one extra pair of eyes on an article. If we don't get that, at least we tried. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 12:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm still concerned that it wasn't a net positive, as I was getting the sense that reviewers were waiting for me to add an article to Urgents before looking at them, and many of those articles could have been closed much sooner. It was beginning to feel like people were waiting for me rather than reviewing articles as they came up. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
On the other hand, maybe if someone beside me is doing the updating, that will be less of an issue. I dunno ... willing to try. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, it's up to you. I treated the urgents as a last call (i.e. if you haven't already reviewed, speak now or forever hold your peace), but the impulse to ration scarce time to just those that are "urgent" is a behavior to be expected. I suppose I'm just happy to see reviews regardless of their impetus. Anyway, I'll give it a go; just give me a few days to familiarize myself (I haven't been around much lately). ЭLСОВВОLД talk 00:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] IFD

I think "I'll strike on the FAC when the notice of the OTRS ticket is posted." means I am suppose to do something to post this image. I don't know what an OTRS ticket is.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

When you said "I notified permissions", I had assumed that to mean you'd emailed the correspondence/permission to OTRS, as their email address is permissions (at) wikimedia (dot) org. See Wikipedia:COPYREQ#When_permission_is_confirmed; if those are indeed steps you've taken, an OTRS member will add a template to the image indicating that permission was received and has been archived. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 13:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:WilliamRemington.jpg

This image would go well in Learned Hand, but I don't know if I can follow the licence. The link shows that some photos are free by gift, but I can't see how to tell whether this one is. Any advice would be appreciated. qp10qp (talk) 19:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that the original uploader was confused, too. The PD claim is being based on the belief that New York World-Telegram & Sun is the copyright holder and has released (via gifting) the image into the public domain. The author, however, appears to be the Associated Press, not the former (both are listed under "notes", so I can see where there might have been confusion). New York World-Telegram & Sun appears to have been merely the assembler of a collection. Indeed, the rights information link states images "were gathered from diverse sources" and "These photographs may be restricted by copyright." The LoC site itself says "Publication may be restricted". As an image created in 1948 (well after 1.1.1923 cutoff), it would not be expected to be PD. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 21:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, many thanks indeed. I rather feared that would be the case, but the image information gave me a sniff of hope. I usually don't stray past the year 1630! qp10qp (talk) 21:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lewis Hamilton FAC

To avoid us tripping over each other, I've just left messages for the four main contributors asking for their thoughts. --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rust Street Images

Indeed, I concur. I am trying to persuade TonyTheTiger to go along with my advice - could you add a few comments to this discussion? He seems to add too many images to all articles he works on, in particular Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago) as well as the Rush Street one. Thanks! — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 22:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'd be happy to comment at the PR or article talk page where there's context and broader exposure to other editors' input. He's welcome to his opinions, after all, and I don't want my joining in on his talk page to give the false impression that he's being pestered (although that, obviously, would not be the intent). I did oppose Rush Street for, among other issues, the superfluous images and subsequent harm to readability and layout, so I believe he already knows where I stand on the matter. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 22:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Image

Deleted. Its original (non-cropped) version, Image:Deltarhynchus flammulatus.jpg needs to be taken care of as well, if it is non-commercial only. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request to check out image

You've helped me out before on possibly suspect images. I have been asked to check the copyright status of this.

. It was apparently uploaded to Commons by its author, from one of his old film prints, and I see no problem with it. Can you confirm this is so? Brianboulton (talk) 22:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It has some curiosities, but seems otherwise ok. I've commented in somewhat more detail and on other "Nimrod" images at the FAC. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 17:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help?

I come bearing two requests. Would you be willing to take a look at the images at William Wilberforce and let us know if all is kosher? We are hoping to take it to FA and would prefer to avoid any nasty surprises if possible! The other, probably more interesting article is Learned Hand where there are some questions about at least one of the images on the talkpage. The source, a Harvard website, says one thing, and the man's bio says a date 20 years later. See [2] and [3]. Any advice or direction welcome! But don't worry if you can't manage either of these. I realize everybody is busy.--Slp1 (talk) 02:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

<replied on article page and Slp1 talk> ЭLСОВВОLД talk 19:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The short version is that the same picture has one date (1930s) in our most reliable source, the Gunther book, and another date (1910) at a Harvard website. [4] which I guess is a not so reliable site in a way. The internal evidence, (physical appearance compared to a known 1912 photo as well as this one with a 1924 date (though I wonder the date of this one too, myself) [5] , suit styles) all suggest the later date, as does the fact that the Harvard photo is inscribed with a dedication to someone who was his legal clerk in the 1930s. It seems unlikely that anyone would give somebody a photo of themselves that is more than 20 years out of date, but I guess it has been done!!! Shoemaker's holiday says he has emailed Harvard and they confirm the 1910 date. I myself am more concerned with accurate descriptions/labels that the copyright situation, but I guess the latter comes into if we opt for the later date. Thanks for your help! Slp1 (talk) 01:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your guidance required

GAN review of 2008 attacks on North Indians in Maharashtra says:

A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: Fail

Being the GAN nominator I would be very glad if an expert like you can point out the copyright concerns with the images so that I can fix them. - KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 (talk) 07:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

<replied on KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 talk> ЭLСОВВОLД talk 19:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for the quick response. I have made changes to the captions (ie. remove periods where not necessary) and also right aligned those images which were pasted under === Subtitle ===. I have also updated the summary of the NFC images - Image:Mumbai violence 20080205.jpg and Image:Mumbai 20080212.jpg. Do I still need to delete one of these or the new description can keep them safe? - KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 (talk) 09:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I still think one needs to go. The only difference is the affiliation of the individuals - affiliations not illustrated by the images and, even if they were, would not seem to be a significant contribution (NFCC#8). Indicating "no" for low resolution is a step in the right direction, but you'll also need an explanation as to why the higher resolution is needed. I'm happy to reduce the size for you, too, if you'd like. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 15:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I would be grateful if you reduce the size of the images. I still can't decide whcich one should I remove? - KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 (talk) 17:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
I'll reduce them this evening. My recommendation would be to keep Image:Mumbai violence 20080205.jpg, although I don't really have a good reason why. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 14:28, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images on William Wilberforce

I saw your post on Slp1's Talk page and, rather than reply there, thought I should contact you directly. Thanks so much for your offer of help. It appears to be the licences that are the problem, as well as explaining to the Flickr contributors exactly what it all means. It's meant a couple of quite long emails already, unfortunately – and they may both now be quite disenchanted with the idea!

The images I originally hoped to use are at [6] and [7] – the first one was actually uploaded a month or two back, used for the article and speedily deleted after two days or so. I have the originators' full permission to use both photos (but have been trying to explain to them about the licensing terms, etc.

Any help you may be able to give would be much appreciated. Please feel free to contact Adam and Alan (the photographers) if you feel that may help – Cheers, Bruce Agendum (talk) 21:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I should have said that both Flickr contributors know me as 'Porteous', rather than 'Agendum'. Cheers, Bruce – Agendum (talk) 07:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, I worry about scaring them off by popping up out of the blue (especially if they're already disenchanted). Having not seen the correspondence thus far, how do you think I would be most helpful? Is there a particular aspect they're having difficulty grasping? ЭLСОВВОLД talk 01:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I haven't heard anything from either of them. If I'm honest, it may have been the length of the email and the potential complexity of the process that could have put them off. The licencing thing is the stumbling block, I think. I'll check again to see if they've responded tonight when I get home, and send a brief mail saying that you'll be in touch "on behalf of Wikipedia", or some such thing. Would that be OK? Shall I give your name as ElCobbola? Cheers, Bruce – Agendum (talk) 15:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes, an "introduction" may be helpful. Be careful with the "on behalf of Wikipedia", however; we don't want to give the false impression that I'm an agent of the foundation or in any other way official. I'm just an average Joe. ;) ЭLСОВВОLД talk 14:22, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nimrod Expedition Images

Before you disappear for a few days, could you look briefly at the two replacement images? The new Beardmore image is of from a magazine drawing that can safely be dated to before 1921 when he became Lord Invernairn. The new "furthest south" image is admittedly of a lower quality than the former, but it is the version which is published in my 1911 copy of The Heart of the Antarctic. So both images appear to meet the "prior to 1923" criterion. Brianboulton (talk) 10:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I responded at the FAC; in summary, though, Image:Shacksouth09.jpg just needs the addition of Heart of the Antarctic's bibliographic information. I came across and uploaded some images (Image:Northernparty.png and Image:Northernpartyplateau.png) in case they would be helpful/useful. Thanks for following up on this; I feel badly for prompting you to jump through hoops and I know images issues can be esoteric and, well, annoying. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 16:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May FAC stats award

The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia   
To Elcobbola,
For your superior reviews of at least 36 Featured article candidates during May, thank you for being one of the top reviewers this month and for your careful work and thorough reviews of images to help promote Wiki's finest work. Your polite thoughtful reviews are an inspiration.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Special thanks to Ling.Nut—a retired editor who had a strong commitment to excellence in content review—for designing this award, and to Maralia for running the stats for May.


Just a note (divulging of private e-mail authorized :-): I hope you'll take special pride in the design of this award. Ling.Nut had asked me weeks ago if he could design a new reviewer award and deliver your May award should you qualify, along with a personal message from him. Circumstances intervened (according to him, he'll probably be back after a number of months), but he said the following: "Elcobbola, I must admit that doubting you when we first met was one of the bigger mistakes I have made. You are an awesome contributor to the encyclopedia, and we appreciate you." SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:2008 attacks on North Indians in Maharashtra

Can the concerns regarding images at the FAC be resolved? KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 (talk) 07:24, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Authorised use of image?

This image

dated 1905, has been uploaded to Commons with a claim of PD because copyright has expired. Author is stated unknown. This is a much-used portrait of Bruce (see google:Images), but I'm not sure of the PD claim. Is this safe to use, or is a better justification needed? Help would be much appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 11:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Questionable license on two photos...

I've noticed two photos, Image:Atherton 2.jpg and Image:Atherton 3.jpg, that claim that they are {{PD-USGov-Military-Navy}}, but come from Navsource, a non-Navy website. In general, the source website hosts a lot of PD images from the U.S. Naval Historical Center but also includes photos sent to that site's webmaster for use on that site. (Because the photo owners give Navsource permission to use, I see no copyright-related problems linking to that site.) In the specific case of these two photos, there is no indication at the site (page link here) that the photos are official Navy photos or were taken as a part of "official duties". (There's no indication, though, that they weren't taken in that manner, either.) What is the way to handle tagging or listing such photos to ensure that WP is not listing non-PD photos as PD? Many thanks in advance. — Bellhalla (talk) 13:08, 11 June 2008 (UTC)