User talk:K.Nevelsteen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, K.Nevelsteen! My name is Ryan, aka Acetic Acid. I noticed that you were new and haven't received any messages yet. I just wanted to see how you were doing. Wikipedia can be a little intimidating at first, since it uses different formatting than other sites that use HTML and CSS. In the long run, though, you'll find that the WikiSyntax is a lot easier and faster than those other ways. Here are a few links to get you started:

There are a lot of policies and guides to read, but I highly recommend reading over those first. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Please be sure to sign your name on Talk Pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, along with a link to your user page. This way, others know when you left a message and how to find you. It's easier than having to type out your name, right? :)

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. We can use all the help we can get! Have a nice day. Sincerely, Ryan 11:44, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. See ya! Ryan 12:05, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

1 Unsuitable Images
2 Madonna (entertainer)
3 vampire sublucitres
4 Thanks
5 Watchlist idea
6 Gull
7 freelancer
8 Black Scorpion
9 Ham Sandwich impersonator
10 Thanks!
11 P one, P Two, P Three, P Four
12 External Links
13 Self-portrait.
14 the feature idea we discussed
15 Orphaned redirects
16 your edit; this
17 Promotional photo
18 Claire Forlani
19 Solms TCD
20 Spam
21 Wikipedia:Peer review/Gary Gygax/archive1
22 Troll and Vandal
23 Thank you
24 Just a thought
25 Jennifer Connelly image
26 Merging Memory (computers) into Computer storage
27 Help needed on image
28 Gary Gygax
29 VWN en WCN
30 Orphaned fair use image (Image:MillionDollarBaby02.jpg)
31 Orphaned fair use image (Image:MillionDollarBaby01.jpg)
32 Gary Gygax photos
33 Orphaned fair use image (Image:CalvinKleinJeansAD-SpringSummer2004NataliaVodianova02bySteve.jpg)
34 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Catherine McCormack.jpg)
35 Possibly unfree Image:GaryGygax2.jpg
36 Unspecified source for Image:CNExpo_2005_006_Gary_signing...EGADS!_a_3.5E_PHB!.JPG
37 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Weight of Water, The- 2000.jpg
38 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Queen of the Damned.jpg
39 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Thirteen-2003.jpg
40 Fair use rationale for Image:Heartbreak Ridge- 1986.jpg
41 why I stopped editting

[edit] Unsuitable Images

It's unsuitable because it was not encyclopedic. Wikipedia is not FARK. Nandesuka 21:18, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Please stick comments on user talk pages and not their User space pages.... Sasquatch讲看 06:14, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

The difference is that Einstein actually stuck out his tongue, as opposed to being photoshopped to look like one. The difference is important. Nandesuka 10:55, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Madonna (entertainer)

I re-added the sentence for the reasons that I've been giving on the Talk page (and concerning which there's now an RfC. I corrected the image, spacing, and ToC to the normal Wikipedia style because, well, it's normal Wikipedia style, and it makes the whole thing a lot tidier, and avoids the need for all those spaces and comments. I hope that that's OK. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:09, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

The new layout is fine (though I've edited out all the spacing; I couldn't see why it was there). It's not clear to me that it's better than the normal format, but if you prefer it... --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:04, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

I wonder if the problem lies in the way that you have your browser set up; my removal of the spacing just removed a big gap between the summary and the first section for me. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:14, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] vampire sublucitres

but the "modern real vapmpires" section is about aseparate subculture, not a fcition. could youp lease put it ack?Gavin the Chosen 12:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Hi there! What did I do to earn such praise? I'm glad you liked my photos - which one do you like best? Anyway thanks a lot for your compliments! --Fir0002 09:54, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Watchlist idea

That would be useful, I agree. I don't know how easy it would be to implement, though, or what drain it would be on resources. It would be worth suggesting it, I think. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:37, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gull

Please note I've reverted your changes to this article. The species should be listed in taxonomic, not alphabetical order, which makes no biological sense. jimfbleak 14:54, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Standard texts, such as the on-line Handbook of the birds of the worl (the standard for wikipedia) gives species lists based on relationships between the species. I'm not a biologist, so I take these on trust, but there are often obvious similarities, eg Iceland Gull and Glaucous Gull are next to each other, and both are large and lack any black in the adult plumage.

To be fair, there are a couple of cases where an alphabetical list supplements the taxonomic one. These are for families with hundreds of species, such as dove and hummingbird, just to make it easier to find a particular species. jimfbleak 17:04, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

thanks for fixing the edit counter-it hadn't occurred to me that I didn't have to type in my name every time! Duh... jimfbleak 05:34, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] freelancer

I appreciate your point, but wikipedia articles shouldn't contain advice or caution; otherwise most articles would have them. Adding the point, as you did, that the job can extend beyond normal work hours and work days implies that it could affect home life; we don't really need to say it outright, IMHO. - DavidWBrooks 16:09, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Black Scorpion

Thanks, Kim. He's blocked indefinitely. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:28, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ham Sandwich impersonator

Blocked indefinitely. Thanks for letting me know. He'd also copied the real HS's talk and user pages. I've blanked them and posted a note saying he was blocked for impersonation of HS. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 16:23, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for spotting the vandal that was impersonating me today! I appreciate it, and I'm sure the community at large does as well. I owe you a nice big sandwich I guess. A sandwich of diligence! See you 'round, and thanks once more for your help. The real Hamster Sandwich 16:46, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

This is a special award created for fighting vandalism on my user pages. Wear it with pride, brave Wiki-warrior! Hamster Sandwich 01:19, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

The Sandwich of Diligence ::: Awarded for Unswerving Strength and Tenacity

[edit] P one, P Two, P Three, P Four

What's the purpose of these pages? They are nothing but redirects back to each other. Are you trolling? — JIP | Talk 12:20, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

I don't know if this was serious or not. But seeing as I don't write for the pages which you suggested I take a look at. I would feel it wrong for me to remove anything from them. Havok (T/C) 21:30, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Ah, ok. How I do it is that I look at the sites which are submited. Mostly the pages I remove links from there have been discussions about there being to many links. So many of the editors have come to an aggrement in which links must be discussed before they are put up. Also, if the link is more "vanity" then it's removed. If it adds nothing to the article, for example containing the same information as the article it self, or a site allready linked to, it is removed. Hope this helps! ;) Havok (T/C) 21:38, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Then I would suggest either {{Template:Npov}} or {{Template:Unencyclopedic}} them. If something is unencyclopedic or a personal point of view is stated in the article, it should be removed or re-written. Havok (T/C) 22:03, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

No problem. :) Havok (T/C) 22:59, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Self-portrait.

Hey, they call me mellow yellow. :D Acetic Acid 11:26, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] the feature idea we discussed

sorry for not putting my signature on that discussion we had about the feature, but it was me, Urthogie who was discussing the following with you: Couple of things to fix
i was wondering if you think any of my ideas should be implemented, and if so, how do we go about showing them to the administrators?

[edit] Orphaned redirects

Orphaned redirects are not speedy deletion candidates, please stop labeling them as such. Orphaned redirects are actually useful for a number of reasons and are not even deleted via Redirects for Deletion, much less speedy deleted. - SimonP 00:35, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] your edit; this

You liked my edit I see and so you added that. I don't know why you didn't just put that ASCII art of goatse instead? DyslexicEditor 17:09, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Promotional photo

Can you clarify Wikipedia:Publicity_photos? The text is REALLY bad an easy to miss interpret. Can you also clarify exactly what a promo photo of a celebrity is? Does a photo taken by someone at a premier event and the photo being is spread all over the internet and finally landing on a fan site qualify it as promo? Classify this please [1]. Cheers. --None-of-the-Above 14:17, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm not a lawyer, but… in my understanding, a publicity photo would strictly mean one put out for purposes of publicity by the subject of the photo: for example, an actor's headshot or a band's official photos put out in their publicity pack, or an executives photo distributed as part of a press release. The fact that other sites (typically fan sites) have violated copyright by massively reproducing (for example) a wire service photo or a picture from a magazine or newspaper does not remove that photo from copyright, it just means that the copyright has been heavily violated. Wikipedia is simply a lot more scrupulous about this than the average site. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:03, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

As for the image you were asking about, follow the link: the page it is attributed to clearly claims copyright. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:04, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

I am trying to learn here, so can you please tell me what you would think about the copyright on this image [2]. Clearly no source, but is it a promo photo? Is it technically valid to be on Wikipedia? --None-of-the-Above 17:11, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

The lack of a cited source argues strongly that it is probably a copyvio. A quick Google image search for "Sean Penn" turned this up as the second image given. They find it on a Russian site (not usually a good sign) that also gives no information where they got the picture. I'd bet money that it is a wire service image, or something similar. In any case, it would be copyrighted (because any photo taken since 1973 is automatically copyrighted), so unless we have a specific basis to claim rights to it (basically, overt permission from the copyright holder), I don't see how we could make an honest claim that we have a right to use this picture. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:59, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Claire Forlani

Thing started simple. Until 1965 Twickenham was in Middlesex and not part of London at all.

However, in 1965 Middlesex was abolished and Twickenham became part of the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (which was created from places that had been in Surrey and Middlesex).

So "Middlesex, London" would not be correct.

Mrsteviec 17:28, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Solms TCD

Kim, thanks for finding this. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solms TCD. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:18, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spam

Please refrain from link advertising all over Wikipedia. Thanks. --None-of-the-Above 21:06, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Why would a related external link be spam? I just placed some links to the About Gay Movies site on pages that were about film and gay. In my opinion this is not spam. Please don't delete my work. Lordmarchmain

When you add the same link to 3 or 4 articles at the same time, that is spamming. Usually every article has a handful of URLs as external links that pretain very well to that specific article. --None-of-the-Above 22:04, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Mostly because vandalism is quite common on Wikipedia. Page blanking, LOUD comments, etc... A lot of them just edit and run. Please feel free to contribute. --None-of-the-Above 22:11, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Lordmarchmain

[edit] Wikipedia:Peer review/Gary Gygax/archive1

I noticed you created a new peer review request and listed it at Wikipedia:Peer review/September 2005 with old, inactive, archived requests instead of at Wikipedia:Peer review were all the current, active requests are located. Was there any reason why you wished to create this request and then place it in a location where it is unlikely to receive attention from any reviewers?

Some of the rewording you made to the peer review instructions has also been corrected to return to the longstanding practice of placing the active requests on the peer review page and the old requests in the various archive pages. --Allen3 ^talk 12:11, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review and other service pages that receive a large volume of edits generally have instructions and other header information located in templates. This allows for edits to the instructions to be separated from edits for new requests in peoples watchlists. Hopefully this has not caused too much confusion. --Allen3 ^talk 13:31, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Troll and Vandal

For some reason, you decided to troll my edits and vandalize much of my work, putting inappropriate notices on them and attempting to delete them. If you do this any more, I will file an RfC against you. I am not going to have all my contributions vandalized by a troll editing in bad faith. See what happened to the last troll and vandal who did the same thing, User:-Ril- and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/-Ril-. --Noitall 13:03, September 8, 2005 (UTC) DO NOT DELETE THIS COMMENT -- THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE WARNING FOR YOUR ACTIONS TARGETING ME (AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO YOU ARE EXCEPT FOR ONE PAGE) --Noitall 13:19, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

User_talk:Noitall#5_orphaned_images

Based on your comments on my talk page, I assume the matter is done and we can move on. --Noitall 14:06, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Kim, thanks for reverting that horrible vandalism from my talk page. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:39, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Just a thought

This may not satisfy all of your needs, but if you don't show some support, we're not likely to get even this much. — Xiong 熊 talk * 10:46, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jennifer Connelly image

Hi I'm afraid Image:JenniferConnelly-Bm2b.jpg doesn't qualify as a promo photo. Photos taken at awards, premieres etc. are usually taken by photo/news agencies such as AP or wireimages so aren't allowed on wikipedia. Promo photos have to be relased by the person, their agent or employer i.e. film or music company. Thanks Arnie587 20:13, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi I moved one of the screenshots in its place which is OK for fair use as long as there is comment on her appearence in that film in the article. Bye Arniep 12:13, 9 October 2005 (UTC) (Arnie587)

[edit] Merging Memory (computers) into Computer storage

In case you would otherwise miss it, I thought I should point out that an editor has proposed merging the page you split off back into Computer storage. See Talk:Computer storage#Cleanup and merging. -R. S. Shaw 07:22, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Help needed on image

Hi K.Nevelsteen

I need some help on an image, and since I found you on Wikipedia:Image sleuthing, I thought you might be able to help me. I'd uploaded an image (Image:Roddick1 miami2005.jpg) from the website http://www.nickaweb.com. This image is copyrighted by the webmaster of the site, and I asked him by email for permission to use it. He gives away pictures that he takes himself, freely for use. Later, I also gave him a link to Wikipedia, and the article I'd added the image to, and he said that there was no problem. Now, someone changed the image summary at a later point of time to provide a link to a completely different picture, after which User:Petaholmes added a 'no source' tag to it. I want to know if this tag can be removed. Is this picture okay to be used? I have no intention of using something that shouldn't be here, so please tell me if the use is not right. I did not get a response from Petaholmes. Thanks a lot. -Aabha (talk) 15:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I have added some more information to the summary, please have a look at it now. Thanks again. -Aabha (talk) 14:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. -Aabha (talk) 04:11, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gary Gygax

I recently edited this page. You reverted it, saying it was bad and brutal copyedit. Please look again. The only bit of info I removed was the line about him having been taught pinochle by his mother and chess by his brother, which I found to be too detailed, compared to the rest of the article. I added a number of reference quotes, and implemented the new ref-tag, wrote out previously unintroduced words such as RPG and fixed what I believed was a typo.

Please revert your edit. You are free to put back the deleted line, but reverting wholesale is not necessary, in my opinion. -- Ec5618 15:36, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VWN en WCN

Beste allemaal Al enige tijd is er een Nederlandstalig chapter in oprichting, te vinden op http://nl.wikimedia.org . Dit wordt de Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland (VWN). Je kunt je interesse om lid te worden van deze vereniging hier aangeven.

Deze vereniging gaat eind augustus/begin september een Wikimedia Conferentie in Nederland (WCN) houden, volgend op Wikimania in Boston, gedeeltelijk erop inspelend middels een aantal discussiegroepen. Om iets dergelijks te organiseren is imput erg gewenst. Dus als je wilt meehelpen, of als je interesse hebt om bij een dergelijk evenement aanwezig te zijn, geef dat dan aan op nl.wikimedia. Ik hoop daar snel je imput tegemoet te zien! Met vriendelijke groet, effeietsanders 16:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:MillionDollarBaby02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:MillionDollarBaby02.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. meco 14:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:MillionDollarBaby01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:MillionDollarBaby01.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

[edit] Gary Gygax photos

I saw that you have uploaded two photos of Gary Gygax on en.wiki. It's possible to upload them to commons, so they could be used also on other language wikipedia ? --Moroboshi 21:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the try.--Moroboshi 07:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:CalvinKleinJeansAD-SpringSummer2004NataliaVodianova02bySteve.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:CalvinKleinJeansAD-SpringSummer2004NataliaVodianova02bySteve.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 19:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Catherine McCormack.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Catherine McCormack.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:GaryGygax2.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:GaryGygax2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 14:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:CNExpo_2005_006_Gary_signing...EGADS!_a_3.5E_PHB!.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:CNExpo_2005_006_Gary_signing...EGADS!_a_3.5E_PHB!.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 14:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Weight of Water, The- 2000.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Weight of Water, The- 2000.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Queen of the Damned.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Queen of the Damned.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Thirteen-2003.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Thirteen-2003.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Heartbreak Ridge- 1986.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Heartbreak Ridge- 1986.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -MBK₀₀₄ 03:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] why I stopped editting

Yeah, right. A man like Gary that answers 300 mails a day is REALLY going to go through the trouble of all that copyright info. Largely why I stopped editting. Too much red tape. Give me a break. Real shame.

(Above copied from Talk:Gary_Gygax#Deleted_Gygax_photo, since my reply is off topic for Gary Gygax.) I know it can be frustrating. I've had an image deleted for exactly the same reason. I have to face deletion attempts on fair use images with far too much frequency. As a result, I've largely given up on seeking copyright approvals. But don't just give up editing! You've done good work! Just steer clear of the more frustrating bits. Thanks for all your work in the past; I hope you choose to come back. — Alan De Smet | Talk 23:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)