Talk:Royal Australian Artillery
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Anotherclown in topic Non-free file problems with File:Royal Artillery Cap Badge.jpg
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Royal Australian Artillery article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Non-free file problems with File:Royal Artillery Cap Badge.jpg edit
File:Royal Artillery Cap Badge.jpg is non-free and has been identified as possibly not being in compliance with the non-free content policy. For specific information on the problems with the file and how they can be fixed, please check the message at File:Royal Artillery Cap Badge.jpg. For further questions and comments, please use the non-free content review page. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 12:55, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
- Probably should look again - clearly has a FUR for all three of the articles you tagged it for. Can't claim to know if its a valid one but its been there since 2006. Anotherclown (talk) 10:05, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
- See WP:NFCC#10c. Such a group rationale is unacceptable. A separate rationale is required for each use. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 10:11, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
- So fix it yourself - its not hard to actually make a contribution rather than just being lazy and tagging something. Anotherclown (talk) 10:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
- Please read the policy instead of accusing me of being lazy. WP:NFCCE is clear in that it is the duty of the people who want to use the non-free content to provide a valid rationale for that use. If I were lazy I wouldn't care to perform this tagging in the first place. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 10:24, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
- Rubbish - I never uploaded the image, I just stumbled across your pathetic tag job which lacks the detail req'd for someone to deal with. You clearly understand policy so why not just fix the problem when you found it rather than relying on someone else to do so? Sounds like the definition of lazy to me. Anotherclown (talk) 09:56, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
- Please read the policy instead of accusing me of being lazy. WP:NFCCE is clear in that it is the duty of the people who want to use the non-free content to provide a valid rationale for that use. If I were lazy I wouldn't care to perform this tagging in the first place. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 10:24, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
- So fix it yourself - its not hard to actually make a contribution rather than just being lazy and tagging something. Anotherclown (talk) 10:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
- See WP:NFCC#10c. Such a group rationale is unacceptable. A separate rationale is required for each use. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 10:11, 9 July 2013 (UTC)