User talk:Grendelkhan
|
|---|
| 1 (—2006-07-17) 2 (2006-07-17—2008-01-02) 3 (2008-01-03—2008-05-01) 4 (2008-05-11—2011-12-31) 5 (2012) 6 (2013-2015) 7 (2016) 8 (2016-11-01—) |
Orphaned non-free image File:Stunt Driver splash screen.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Stunt Driver splash screen.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 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).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Administrative permissions and inactivity reminder[edit]
This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:20, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G'Kar until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
QuicoleJR (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Administrative permissions and inactivity reminder[edit]
This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Too many image nominations[edit]
Sure you can nominate "legally", but why are you doing it? Too many major paintings to keep up with. Matisse? His goldfish images? Many of these and others are subjects of their own articles, and thus non-replaceable illustrations. As for the many André Derain images, they will all be out of copyright in early September (70 years after Derain's death). Anyway, too many at once, and some are classics. Not understanding why you want to do this. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- US copyright law is based on publication, not date of death of the author. I have been linking to the relevant policy in each of my nominations, I think. (See Wikipedia:Public_domain#Publication.) Is it unclear to you? If these should be changed into fair use images, they would have to be downscale appropriately and new tags added.
- My first nomination noted that Commons is very cavalier about the actual requirements of US copyright law. Are we also cavalier about the requirements of US copyright law?
- I noticed this because I was researching public domain art to use for covers for standard ebooks. Standard Ebooks is strict about their interpretation of US copyright law, and I noticed that we have a lot of potential copyright violations. That's how I got here. grendel|khan 22:53, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- You chose some of the most renowned Matisse paintings to test your theory. The ones that have articles should definitely be tagged with a fair use reasoning (maybe you can do that to them and others before nominating them). As for the number, putting up so many deletion noms in a day or two really loads the system in the deletioners favor, as most editors won't have the time to go through each one. Anyway, Wikipedia's entirely accepted fair use provisions should keep the Matisse's you've nommed, and I would ask you to reconsider with an eye towards adding fair use templates to those which have articles. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think it's worth taking this to a broader forum. (Fair use involves a specific rationale for each article the picture is used in, as well as using a minimal portion of it, and a serious consideration of the necessity of its use. It's not a simple substitution.) See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#The_copyright_policy_for_paintings_is_not_taken_seriously.. grendel|khan 14:51, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- You chose some of the most renowned Matisse paintings to test your theory. The ones that have articles should definitely be tagged with a fair use reasoning (maybe you can do that to them and others before nominating them). As for the number, putting up so many deletion noms in a day or two really loads the system in the deletioners favor, as most editors won't have the time to go through each one. Anyway, Wikipedia's entirely accepted fair use provisions should keep the Matisse's you've nommed, and I would ask you to reconsider with an eye towards adding fair use templates to those which have articles. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)