Hello,
I understood that a few seconds of music are "fair use",
we do not distribute the entire song but only a sample
suitable to give a first impression.
I somewhat understood why a picture of Donald Duck is
"fair use". We are not in the same business as Disney,
we are writing an encyclopedia and not comic books.
But I can't understand why this
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image%3A843-870_Europe.jpg
is fair use. The map has been created for an encyclopedia
or an history textbook. If this is fair use, is there any
picture we may not use?
JeLuF
cprompt wrote:
> > OK, but honestly, how offensive can it really be to have someone's dog
> > eat god's hat? I mean, come on folks...
> >
> > -----
> >
> > Dante Alighieri
> > dalighieri(a)digitalgrapefruit.com
> Hehe, on first look I saw the word "shat", the past and past participle
> of "shit". I guess it goes both ways. :-)
Isn't this almost exactly the same situation as TMC? (which of course
referred only to a large, radioactive chicken).
If this is not meant to seem offensive, perhaps the name could be given
clarifying spaces between words.
(apologies if I've missed any sorting of this, and for the slow response
- I have no connection in my new home until next week)
sannse
Sending again, sent from the wrong address before:
OK, I've been going through the gory details over at List of French
monarchs and Clovis I (the talk pages). It seems to me that whatever the
case may be, Triton is being deliberately confrontational... and not in a
good way. He is consistently abusive and uses language that I believe is
designed to worsen, not better, the situation. A few choice examples:
We now have someone calling themselves Slrubenstein reverting my facts. Why
is this vandalism going on?
To the User logged in calling himself Tannin - refrain from accusations
unless you have proof.
And by the way, Ms. Kemp, don't even infer plagiarism, you are far from
qualified in law
Don't you think it a bit childish, besides dishonest, to insert "Belgium"
after deleting Toxandria. Or did you not study any of this but decided to
hide it from others?
Act like an adult, behave like the professional you claim to be, and please
correct your improper deletions. And, I will indeed ask Jimbo Wales to look
at your deletions, assertions and derogatory remarks about other erstwhile
contributors to his website
you have deleted facts straight from the James book which you obviously
never read. I shall reverse your attempts to distort and cover up.
As an aside, Ms. Kemp intimidated some of these people who either now say
nothing or have left.
*****
In my opinion, this is not the language of a person who is seriously
engaged in a scholarly dispute in an attempt to arrive at factual
conclusions. It has been my experience that ad hominem attacks are
typically made by people who do not have a logical or reasonable argument
to make. I suggest that someone please look into this matter seriously.
Please note that I know very little about French monarchy, I'm dealing here
with what I see as an abusive user, whether or not his idea(s) about French
monarchy are valid.
-----
Dante Alighieri
dalighieri(a)digitalgrapefruit.com
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their
neutrality in times of great moral crisis."
-Dante Alighieri, 1265-1321
I know it isn't nice to say, but I think this may be a case of serious
troll-ness. I will try to stop feeding, but will continue to work on
any articles I feel, with the usual explanations for changes. For the
record, though, considering the crap that this person says, implies,
insinuates, or otherwise communicates about me on this site, I'd like to
bop this wanker (it's the mildest thing I can think to say at the
moment) in the nose.
Jules
OK, I've been going through the gory details over at List of French
monarchs and Clovis I (the talk pages). It seems to me that whatever the
case may be, Triton is being deliberately confrontational... and not in a
good way. He is consistently abusive and uses language that I believe is
designed to worsen, not better, the situation. A few choice examples:
We now have someone calling themselves Slrubenstein reverting my facts. Why
is this vandalism going on?
To the User logged in calling himself Tannin - refrain from accusations
unless you have proof.
And by the way, Ms. Kemp, don't even infer plagiarism, you are far from
qualified in law
Don't you think it a bit childish, besides dishonest, to insert "Belgium"
after deleting Toxandria. Or did you not study any of this but decided to
hide it from others?
Act like an adult, behave like the professional you claim to be, and please
correct your improper deletions. And, I will indeed ask Jimbo Wales to look
at your deletions, assertions and derogatory remarks about other erstwhile
contributors to his website
you have deleted facts straight from the James book which you obviously
never read. I shall reverse your attempts to distort and cover up.
As an aside, Ms. Kemp intimidated some of these people who either now say
nothing or have left.
*****
In my opinion, this is not the language of a person who is seriously
engaged in a scholarly dispute in an attempt to arrive at factual
conclusions. It has been my experience that ad hominem attacks are
typically made by people who do not have a logical or reasonable argument
to make. I suggest that someone please look into this matter seriously.
Please note that I know very little about French monarchy, I'm dealing here
with what I see as an abusive user, whether or not his idea(s) about French
monarchy are valid.
-----
Karim Moussally
kmoussally(a)cal.berkeley.edu
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly
submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his
intelligence."
-Albert Einstein, attributed
I have blocked Helga's IP address again, as per Jimbo's explanation that
she is still banned. Please note that Helga has a static IP, 66.47.62.78.
The blocking reason is:
"Static IP address of banned user Helga Jonat. You were unbanned by
accident -- if you want to contribute again, please send a message to:
jwales at bomis dot com"
I have not banned her username, H. Jonat.
I would still like to know who unblocked her, just in case it was not an
accident. It should be determinable by looking up the URL
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/
wiki.phtml?title=Special:Ipblocklist&action=unblock&ip=66.47.62.78
in the Apache access log, unless it happened too long ago.
Regards,
Erik
[re-posted - I was previously not subscribed]
Yesterday, [[Peter Hollingworth]] resigned as [[Governor-General of
Australia]]. I have added an item to [[Current events]] and updated the
Hollingworth and G-G pages. Does this warrant an "In the news" listing
on the main page? I am not a sysop.
Claudine Chionh
Is there any way one of the folks who know how to do these things can
check and see if Triton is Elliot (not banned, I don't think, but
possibly an earlier version of DW) or in fact DW? The arguments are the
same, and the picture uploads are, too, I think. I am not trying to
spread false accusations; however, several wikipedians have noted the
similarities on my page and elsewhere. I'd also like to thank everyone
who has stepped in and tried to tone things down. His nastiness towards
me hasn't stopped (although I note that now, rather than having accused
him of being obtuse, etc., he now claims I accused someone else of that
and it drove that user off. Frankly, at this point, I'm not sure who
said what, there is so much that is unsigned.
As for Helga, I know exactly how she feels. Could we somehow replace
her name with something like User X? I only ask because the arguments
she was involved in often include really good examples of methodology
and how wikipedians try to reach consensus. Otherwise, unless anyone
else feels it's integral to the project, I suppose there would be no
harm and might help to maintain goodwill. If people are worried about
the future, there could always be an archived copy.
Julie
On Tuesday 27 May 2003 02:51 am, wikien-l-request(a)wikipedia.org wrote:
> The bottom of [[fr:Accueil]], the French Wikipedia's home page, contains
> the text "Site gracieusement hébergé par _Bomis_", with a link to the
> website. Loosely translated, it says, "Site graciously hosted by Bomis."
> Should we add something like this to the [[en:Main Page]], e.g., "Thanks to
> [[Bomis]] (www.bomis.com) for hosting the Wikipedia!"? It's awfully nice of
> them to provide for what's probably the last big site on the Internet
> without banner ads and popups; we really ought to say thanks somehow, and
> at the least give them a bit of traffic.
>
> -Geoffrey
Actually I just tried to go to http://www.bomis.com on my work's computer and
was blocked by our censorware because Bomis has sports content and/or porn in
its directory (we had to install this censorware to make sure state workers
don't spend half their day reading sports or looking at porn).
That is fine with me except for the possibility that by having such a link to
Bomis.com on en.wiki's Main Page we may get Wikipedia similarly blacklisted
(thus blocking about 100,000 California state workers from even reading
Wikipedia).
Something to think about at the very least...
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
>Since his articles are deleted
>on sight, it would be quite difficult for me to judge
>whether they can be salvaged or not. Right ?
That completely misses the point. Whether they can or cannot be salvaged is
irrelevant. It could be a 100% accurate, well written thought-provoking
masterpiece, but still it should be deleted. The content is irrelevant. The
issue is that this is a multiple banned user who has vandalised user pages,
issued threats and then sidesteps Jimbo's ban by getting on and doing the
same thing over and over again.
Leaving a single letter that he contributed to wikipedia undermines the
entire project, because it sends the message to him and to other banned
users that they can circumvent the ban and get away with it. Only a scorched
earth policy of 100% removal on sight will stop him. If he finds that the
hours he spends adding stuff are 100% wasted because everything he touches
is undone, every article he writes is binned automatically, that will force
him to do one of two things:
1. If he wants to be a serious contributor who can add things on to wiki and
have them left on wikipedia rather than deleted, he HAS to contact Jimbo,
discuss the situation with him and get the ban lifted.
2. If he is simply interested in screwing wiki around as a joke, a blanket
deletion policy will show him that he is wasting his time and effort. If he
is (a) ignored completely, and (b) everything he does is shot down and
binned on site, he will eventually give up in frustration. It may take a
week, a month but eventually this tiresome vandal with get the message.
There are only so many times he can devote hours and hours to working on
things only to find every minute was wasted because everything he did was
binned on sight.
Allowing anything he works on to be treated with the same respect as
everyone else's articles makes a mockery of the ban. Today's Michael article
may be 100% accurate. Tomorrow's 80% accurate, 20% complete bullshit. Next
Friday's 100% accurate, Saturday's 50% accurate 50% completely made up. In
the meantime serious contributors end up having to babysit this vandal,
double-checking everything he writes. And all the time he is laughing his
head off at our gullibility and wonder how many times in how many new
personæ can he get onto wiki and plant rubbish in among the facts. We
already have DW back causing chaos in his behaviour, Adam/Lir/Vera
Cruz/Susan Mason/Dietary Fiber is back again pulling the same stunts as he
pulled elsewhere.
Unless a ban is 100% enforced, with 100% deletion of 100% of the
contributions of 100% of banned trolls (particularly those with a history of
muliple identities and multiple bans) you will never drive banned users away
or force them to contact Jimbo and get the ban lifted. To treat such users
in the same manner as we treat ordinary decent serious contributors is to
insult the 99% of users who are not banned and take this project seriously.
They, not Michael, should be our first concern. Wiki should be the home of
proper contributors, not a rest home for vandals and trolls whose behaviour
is simply encouraged by attempts at appeasement.
JT
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
