User talk:Remember the dot

Archives

2006 Nov - Dec
2007 Jan - Mar
2007 Apr - Jun
2007 Jul - Sep

User talk:PNG crusade bot

Don't you hate mindless bots and their mindless operators? Anyway, are you going to do anything about them or sit there and let >1000 images be deleted by lazy admins with scripts? – 86.157.254.208 22:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like it any more than you do, but I don't care strongly enough about it to write rationales for every single image that passes through the PNG crusade bot. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 06:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Poppy Bros. Jr. from Kirby Super Star.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Poppy Bros. Jr. from Kirby Super Star.png. 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 23:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ᑎᑎᕋᐅᓯᖅ ᓄᑖᖅ

I saw your reply at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) and that you are using IE7. Just out of interest can you see the syllabics in the section header or do you get little boxes? The thing is I installed IE7 at work and can no longer edit syllabics with IE or Maxthon. Firefox is fine though. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer using Firefox. It does a better job of displaying fancy Unicode characters like these. That said, IE7 on Windows Vista does not seem to have a problem with it (Vista's out-of-the-box Unicode coverage is significantly more complete than XP's). I'm sure there are free fonts out there that would enable you to view these characters on IE7 on XP, perhaps with some help from Template:Unicode. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 08:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll give it try when I get back to work. I'm at home now and after I saw what IE7 did to the syllabics I didn't bother changing over, so I can see them fine. Someone turned on the automatic updates on the work computers and it caused several problems. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as far as automatic updates, you should understand that by disabling them you are making your computer(s) far less secure and several times decreasing their performance as well. For example, IE6 does not handle a certain kind of PNG transparency properly, so on Wikipedia we have to use a JavaScript workaround that slows IE6 down a bit. IE7 does not have this problem and should actually go a bit faster than IE6, on top of the benefit of significantly improved security features in IE7 compared to IE6. Other Windows updates that you're missing out on are the regular security updates. In short, these help keep your computer's security one step ahead of hackers/malicious users, and failing to install them would leave your computer vulnerable to attack. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 08:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The updates do get installed, just not automatically. The reason I turned them off at home is MS would also install non-MS updates. At one point with the updates turned on it installed newer drivers for the video card. Both monitors went blank and involved too much sillines to fix. With the auto update turned off but the notification turned on I can check when the message pops up. I can then get the MS updates and follow that up by going to the makers site for any other newer drivers that are available. It's easier that way to fix any problems that occur at home. At work there are only two of us at work that know anything about computers and what to do if an update causes problems. One of us is bound to be on a night shift within a day or two of the updates coming out and we can install them then. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just reading this. I guess in some cases it doesn't matter if they are on or off. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the extremely late reply. that only applies to updates of the Windows Update program itself. Windows Update won't install Windows patches if it is turned off, but it will still update itself so that it can know whether new patches are available or not. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 17:35, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion

Dot,

Hey, I kinda feel belittled with this comment. I "fixed" what I saw to be a fairly obvious typo here, as well as voting. I would have appreciated a more personalized comment, rather than an impersonal template. But either way, thanks for helping me out. —Scouter Sig 15:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mergefrom

Hey I've undid your recent edit to this template. I don't know what you were doing, but you made a mistake and it messed up the template. I think you just made an error in your syntax or something, you should look into it. Atropos 22:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot request

I was wondering if you would consider coding an image renaming bot, along the lines of PNG crusade bot. (The reason I'm asking you is that I have zero coding skills, and this function would be very similar to what PNG crusade bot already does.) What I was thinking is that {{ifr}} could be modified to include a parameter for a suggested new name, and a bot could do the image upload under the new name (if there's no conflict) and replace the name in the articles in which the image is used. What do you think? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 22:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea. It's rather messy to re-upload an image, not in the least because the bot is listed as the uploader instead of the original uploader. This causes all those "your image will be deleted because you haven't provided a pre-emptive defense for why we should keep it" messages to land on User talk:PNG crusade bot, where they are largely ignored. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 22:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

template "update"

I admit to reverting the last edit of yours for the temeplate. The graphics images would not show up for the right image. I don't know why the prior edit works for the graphics. I'm using Mac Safari browser.
-- Yellowdesk 00:48, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Chinese Taipei National Baseball Team logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Chinese Taipei National Baseball Team logo.png. 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 04:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Hot 93.3.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Hot 93.3.png. 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 04:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Blazer 4.0 screenshot.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Blazer 4.0 screenshot.png. 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 04:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:HMS Argonaut (F56).png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:HMS Argonaut (F56).png. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 13:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colors

Hi. Could you please explain why you changed the colors on WP:TS in this edit? The previous colors looked far nicer (much more vivid). Where was this change discussed? —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That edit was performed to match the actual colors now used in MediaWiki:Common.css. AzaToth changed them to "reduce the bleeding," and I then changed three of them to shift the new orange and yellow selections closer to the originals (while hopefully not increasing the bleeding) and to bring the green (which was adopted after AzaToth's edit) in line with the others.

My only interest was in keeping the colors distinct (as opposed to AzaToth's red-like orange) and comparable to one another (as opposed to AzaToth's tan-like shade of yellow and the almost neon-like shade of green that was suddenly added with almost no discussion), but I will note that some people previously complained that the original hues were too vivid. —David Levy 09:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Queensland Country Heelers logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Queensland Country Heelers logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Elder Faust.jpg

The dates I added to Image:Elder Faust.jpg and others are actually rather important (specifically the death date) as a number of images where a free image cannot be created have been deleted, even though the person a no longer living and a new image cannot be created. Rather that added the wording that the person is deceased to each of these article, it made more sens to me to add their birth & death dates. This also helps when there are multiple people with similar names. As for removing the space between the == and a section heading wording, I remove those as a matter of course when I notice them, as they can keep something like this: [[Image:Elder Faust.jpg#Licencing]] from properly linking to a specific section on a page here at WP. -- 159.182.1.4 02:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of World Community Grid

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article World Community Grid you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 2 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Pursey ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:ESRB E10+.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:ESRB E10+.png. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:33, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:ESRB M.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:ESRB M.png. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:ESRB AO.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:ESRB AO.png. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:AGIAbortionReasonsBarChart.png‎

I saw you tagged Image:AGIAbortionReasonsBarChart.png‎ as having no source. The image looks OK to me, so before I removed the tag, I wanted to see what your concern was.-Andrew c ^[talk] 17:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In case you don't read the Pump

I have no idea if this is related to the recent PNG fixes or not, but you should take a look here. Cheers. --MZMcBride 01:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for quick review of additions to the PatchGuard / Kernel patch protection page.

Hello,

You seem to have been doing the most maintaining of the PatchGuard page recently, so I figured I'd pose this request here. I made some choice improvements (IMHO of course :) to the article in question. However, if at all possible, it'd be nice to have someone else do a quick once-over of the changes as it seems to me to be a bit awkward to be contributing muchly to that article given WP:NOR and WP:POV concerns. (Or that's my outside view, being not having done all that much Wikipedia contributions myself to date. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

Anyways, would you mind taking a quick glance at the recent changes to see if you've got any objections on Wikipedia-related grounds?

I've attempted to ensure all my contributions on that page were cited, however, some of them are of course linking to materials that I had a hand in authoring or publishing outside of Wikipedia, hence my concern.

Skywing 02:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions look great, thanks :-)

As far as Wikipedia policy, since you made sure to back up your statements with published documents, I don't see any violation of WP:COS. Thanks again, and welcome to Wikipedia! —Remember the dot ^(talk) 03:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pngfix

Hi Dot, I finally cracked the |thumb and |border problem; in the end, the sulotion was so obvious, I wonder why I didn't think of it before. Display-wise, everything is working perfect now, including transparency in Commons galeries. All that remains are potential problems with click events (imagemaps, javascript), but I haven't found an image yet I couldn't click. Even the toolbar still works. Have a look at Common.js. — Edokter • Talk • 21:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, I don't know why it seemed to work on my box; probably had javascript disabled (I'm using the IEDev toolbar). Anyway, have you seen my last comment? How about testing the code as it stands? Behaviourwise I can't find any glitches. And since I'm promoted to admin, I can make the change. — Edokter • Talk • 19:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cracked it! I knew it was something simple. See User talk:Edokter/pngfix and please give it a test. — Edokter • Talk • 21:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:3ammagazine.com screenshot.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:3ammagazine.com screenshot.png. 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. Chris B • talk 19:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:WindowsLoadingDriversVPC.PNG

I see that you're disputing my upload, I don't really mind if it doesn't meet fair use, all I would say is that it, as you know, does replace Windowsloadingdrivers.jpg so I was working on the basis of it being precedent, but it's the first non-free image I've uploaded so I don't know one way or another. --BMT 06:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Say the Time 8 screenshot.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Say the Time 8 screenshot.png. 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 08:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Foundation copyrighted images

Hi, could you explain this edit? I'm not aware of any consensus that prohibits the use of Foundation copyrighted images in userspace. Any discussions I have seen suggests that they should not be treated the same as other unfree images. I'm not aware there has either been a change in local consensus or any directive from the Foundation prohibiting their use... WjBscribe 04:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the name of free content, we remove and delete all sorts of images that pose no legal threat to us. The foundation's logos are kept on the Commons for convenience, not because they are free to use. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 04:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This matter has arisen before. The community has determined that the use of such images in userspace is acceptable and the Foundation has voiced no complaint about their use. Unless that changes, I don't think your edits are supported by consensus and would recommend you avoid editing other people's userspace without their permission. WjBscribe 04:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Wikipedia-banner0002.png

Thanks for the note on my talk page, but that's not my image -- I just reverted some vandalism on it years ago. :) The listed uploader is User:SimonMayer who may be inactive, and the upload is marked as a public domain update of User:Nohat's Wikipedia logo. --brion 20:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(what he said, and also): Are you using a script or suchlike to send these messages? If so you might set it to ignore people who only reverted the image. —Charles P._(Mirv) 08:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Diagram of the constitution of the United States as proposed by Thomas Paine

There are issues exporting as SVG with Dia. Hopefully, the problem will be resolved in the version of Dia packaged in Ubuntu 7.10. -- Mathieugp 22:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this is the fastest reply I've seen in Wikipedia by the way!

I am not at home right now, so I cannot check. However, if I remember correctly, there were font problems and other small glitches. I am on vacation in France right now, but in 3 weeks I'll be back and the new Ubuntu will be out. I am crossing my fingers. : -) -- Mathieugp 22:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation images .. other image nonsense

The use of images containing foundation logos, while they are indeed copyrighted, is permissible in userspace, even while other non-free images are not. It would indeed be quite absurd to suppose that a website's use of its own logo could violate its copyright on that logo. Each of the many, many times this issue has been raised, the consensus of the board and of Wikipedia has been that use of WMF-copyrighted logos in userspace is appropriate. Additionally, screenshots of a tool for Wikimedia, be the tool released under a free license or not, for the purpose of illustrating the software in question on its appropriate project page or discussion page are permissible on those pages by simple common sense. While the screenshots were mis-tagged, I should think it a far better use of your time to retag them or contact me to ask for an explanation of copyright than to go spam me with three redundant templates and mark the images for deletion. Tagging is a job for a bot, not a person. AmiDaniel (talk) 05:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If Wikimedia logos, which violate no copyright, are permitted, then why would Mozilla logos (like the Firefox logo), which also violate no copyright, be prohibited? This makes no sense.

Aside from the Wikipedia logo issue, which I am not pressing, screenshots of non-free software are typically non-free. I looked at User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof#License and found that VandalProof is not under a free license, and therefore screenshots of it would also be non-free. However, since you have clarified that you have released copyright over the user interface elements present in the two screenshots, there is no longer a problem. So, thank you for clarifying! —Remember the dot ^(talk) 18:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JPEG crusader bot?

I was curious - have you ever considered a JPEG crusader bot to convert photographic GIFs that should be JPEG format? Or are you strictly a PNG fan? :) Videmus Omnia ^Talk 19:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I have not, because that would lose a bunch of image quality on top of the massive quality loss by saving photographs in GIF in the first place. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 19:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome message

Why on earth would you welcome an editor that has been here for considerably longer than you? It is one of the shortfalls of using templates blindly. Your edit to Joseph Smith did nothingto improve the article so I don't see why you would issue a warning for "deleting information". You might want to review the purpose of using warning templates and use better judgement in when to apply them. You did no harm, but it is just an annoying approach to editing. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 06:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]