User talk:J Milburn/archive33

Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil

Hi, J Milburn, we gave answers to your questions and made a few corrections in Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil article. Please say something in its FAC page. --Lecen (talk) 12:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:FilipAndTal.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:FilipAndTal.jpg. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. damiens.rf 20:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

B-day

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at MayhemMario's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at MayhemMario's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your current Transformers PRODs

In cases where the character is clearly part of a list of characters from a TV series, shouldn't you start with proposing them to merge with the list of characters when that's clearly going to be the logical result of the PROD? For instance Wedge (Transformers) should merge/redirect to List_of_Transformers:_Robots_in_Disguise_characters#Wedge, not be deleted. You know that as well as I do. Mathewignash (talk) 21:30, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I only have a limited time each day to edit Wikipedia articles, and I like to spend my time finding sources for articles and making them better. Sadly fixing it when people wrongly propose deletion for things that should be merged removes from that time spent IMPROVING the articles. There is no rush to get all the articles deleted. We don't loose anything by taking our time. Tagging them with merge proposals is perfectly acceptable, even if it takes weeks or months, they eventually get merged. This isn't a horse race, it's an encyclopedia. Remember that the instructions for a PROD say "Consider your reasons for deletion and the alternatives to deletion, including whether or not merging the article elsewhere or making it a redirect are more appropriate than deletion." Clearly a character article that is also on a list of characters should merge or redirect to that list, no matter how impatient you are. Mathewignash (talk) 21:48, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I can't believe you can say there has been no real improvement in Transformers articles. The number of sources has increased tremendiously, many articles now have better introductions, articles have been stripped of excessive non-free images, and we even have sections in many article about the character's reception. One of my latest projects is to merge teams into a single article instead of having individual articles for every member, and I constantly monitor all the TF articles to fan fiction that people add in, and remove it. If you do not have the time to research where an article could go first, then you are not really following the very first rule of the PROD, which says to consider alternatives to deletion. If you can only nominate half as many articles for deletion a day, but you spend time researching them first for alternatives, that's a good thing. Doing it slow and right is better than doing it fast.Mathewignash (talk) 22:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I honestly had no problem with the deletion of Flatline. He's just a character that appeared in one comic book, and I don't even think that comic book has an article on Wikipedia to be merged to. I'm mainly worried about characters who were part of the NOTABLE tv series, and appear in the "List of characters from xxx". They should be considered to merge to those lists before deletion is considered. It wouldn't take much research by reading the artlce on Wedge to see he was a character on a TV show, and then looking at that TV show's article see that he's on the list of characters from that show. Mathewignash (talk) 22:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Digital: A Love Story

I've taken care of the image issues you raised at Talk:Digital: A Love Story/GA1. Thanks for the review! --PresN 19:04, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I blame poor drunken decision making. In the light of day, I agree that the logo isn't really a definitive representation of the game, so I pulled the image again. Sorry about that! --PresN 01:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Tiger shark

Hello here, I'm 1007D (pronounced "One-Thousand-Seventy"). Do you remember your GA review on a shark? Anyways, I fucked up nothing to deletion, and nominated this article to GA status, so it's pumping and I need you to review it.

Here are the tasks I want to do:

1. Review the "Tiger shark" article.
2. If you ever positioned it on hold, give me comments to fix the article.
3. When the review is complete, just place that iconic green plus circle as the result of "Pass".

I wish you'd do all of this, because I felt the article needs to become a Good Article again. 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 08:27, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Just be patient. Someone will get to it eventually. J Milburn (talk) 11:56, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'm happy with that. By the way, you are a good friend now. 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 21:58, 18 June 2011 (UTC) 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 08:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Are you gonna review the "Tiger shark" article today (just because I'd not seen anyone creating a page named "Talk:Tiger shark/GA2" for almost two weeks) 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 08:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Seriously McDonalds.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Seriously McDonalds.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

• News and notes: WMF Board election results; Indian campus ambassadors gear up; Wikimedia UK plans; Malayalam Wikisource CD; brief news

• In the news: Wikipedia could become trusted medical resource; neologism controversy; news in brief

• WikiProject report: The Elemental WikiProject

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: One case comes to a close; initiator of a new case blocked as sockpuppet

• Technology report: Engineering department restructured; "break MediaWiki and be reverted"; news in brief

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

S S Miami sock

He's back, only the day after User:Mamma Rose was blocked: [1]. At least he's learned to fill in edit summaries this time. 86.134.119.250 (talk) 17:20, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Your comment at User Talk:Dapi89

Hi, I just saw your comment on Dapi89's talkpage, and wanted to point something out, but didn't want to do it on his talkpage as it has little to do with his block. You argue we should not talk about "violations of copyright" because we are not copyright lawyers, but that is not entirely correct. Copyright infringement is the legal term and that should indeed not be used on wikipedia, but copyright violation is commonly used to refer to our policy wp:Copyright violations. This is an internal policy, which is (for now) formulated stricter than the legal precedent for copyright infringement. There is no requirement of being a copyright lawyer for enforcing a wikipedia policy. Yoenit (talk) 11:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

No, don't worry, I accept that- just yesterday I deleted over 50 files as copyright violations. The point was the Dirk was declaring files as copyright violations when they failed our NFCC- failing the NFCC does not a copyright violation make. J Milburn (talk) 11:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

why not? Yoenit (talk) 12:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I've had a think about this, and I see your point. I am not sure I agree that "copyright violation" means anything other than a violation of copyright, and, if it does, it needs to be made clearer. The NFCC are clearly and deliberately far stricter than law, and not meeting them does not by any stretch of the imagination mean that the use is automatically illegal. Are you effectively looking to argue that anything that does not meet the NFCC is a "copyright violation", as the term has a special, wider meaning on Wikipedia? So, if I uploaded an image licensed under cc-by-sa-nc-3.0 under the NFCC, then used it on my userpage, it'd be a "copyright violation"? J Milburn (talk) 12:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

FOUR

Are you still following Wikipedia_talk:Four_Award#Candidates?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:40, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Page deletion

Hi, the first article I wrote was just deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERKI_Fashion_Show I'd like to first of all disagree on the reason as to why it was deleted (but maybe I'm too close to it so pointing out specifically how a non-profit event whose only objective is to provide a stage to young art and design, while existing for nearly 30 years and organized entirely by students, is self-promotion- I'd really appreciate it, because I truly believe it is of encyclopedic value, and if I'm not mistaken, in it's native country, it already is in an actualy, paper and covers, encyclopedia). Foolishly I didn't save the text either =/. Please help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccchnl (talk • contribs)

vol2 Thank you. It's not going to be easy to tone down the passion. Statements about the show being among the largest and the designs dispayed being the brightes and wildest- it's all common knowledge and actually is mentioned in every one of the referenced articles, unfortunately their all in Estonian and unless you're one of the 1 million people who speak it, you have to take my word for it. Also, I have actually taken the time to track down and interview the people who made the show happen both in the 80s and 90s, basically just for this article. Is there no way of incorporating what I learned from them (like "the accomponiment to wild parties"- I interviewed the 3 designers who were actually there and that's what they told me)? Leave their names and phone nr's for reference =p?

Ok, this is about as much as I can write with english references. Any better? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ccchnl/ERKI_Fashion_Show — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccchnl (talk • contribs) 22:58, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Seriously McDonalds

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

ummm...

I think I got everything (?). Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:36, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

thx :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Vidkun Quisling/archive1

Hey JM. I'm going away for a week from tomorrow; my (non-)qualification in the cup depends upon this FAC. It hasn't passed yet, but there's a small chance it might before the deadline. Would you mind checking it before you round up proceedings? - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 10:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. Unfortunately, I have also realised that I will have to automate the bot change over. I'll let you know if I can't. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 11:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Yup, looks like it should all work. If it doesn't, I'm back on the 5th July. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 15:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

License Template idea

I was wondering if it would make sense to make a license template (on Commons) for the public domain Ernest Hemingway images donated to the the JFK Library in Boston? So for example File:ErnestHemingwayHadley1922.jpg is marked as public domain at the JFK library website here. Questions come up in image reviews at FAC like the one here, so I thought a common template might help. Anyway, what do you think of this idea? Would it be worth doing? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:48, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I will contact the library and see if they can provide a reason why these are PD. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I have heard back from the library and they have explained the PD licenses in more detail - sent you an email with some of the details, am waiting to make sure it is OK to forward the email (if you want). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:02, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

• News and notes: ArbCom database theft; WikiLove to roll out on the English Wikipedia; brief news

• In the news: Russian president uploads to Wikimedia Commons; brief news

• WikiProject report: The Continuous Convention: WikiProject Comics

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Proposed decision for Tree shaping case

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

GA review?

Hi, J Milburn. Would you mind reviewing this good article candidate if you're interested? It's been waiting for quite some time now. Thanks for your help! Jsayre64 (talk) 02:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:FARC-child-soldiers.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:FARC-child-soldiers.jpg. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. damiens.rf 14:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Judas Jump

I was considering creating a new article for this band, but I note that this message appeared - 19:38, 3 May 2007 J Milburn (talk | contribs) deleted "Judas Jump" ‎ (Deleting page - reason was: "Article about a non-notable individual, band, service, website or other entity" using NPWatcher). I believe the band does qualify as notable under Wikipedia:Notability (music) guidelines 1, 4, 6, and 11. The Allmusic article is here [2] and band membership included Andy Bown (Status Quo), Henry Spinetti and Alan Jones (Amen Corner). The band also appeared at the Isle of Wight Festival 1969. Will this suffice ? Thank you.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Hurricane Rick

Hurricane Rick is notable. By its intensity in mb, Rick was the second most powerful storm ever recorded in the EPac basin. It was even forcasted to have it's intensity beat Linda's record. Hurricanefan25 (talk) 16:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 June newsletter

We are half way through 2011, and entering the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; the semi-finals are upon us! Points scored in the interim (29/30 June) may be counted towards next round, but please do not update your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. 16 contestants remain, and all have shown dedication to the project to reach this far. Our round leader was Casliber (submissions) who, among other things, successfully passed three articles through featured article candidates and claimed an impressive 29 articles at Did You Know, scoring 555 points. Casliber led pool D. Pool A was led by Wizardman (submissions), claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by Eisfbnore (submissions), who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by Hurricanehink (submissions), who claimed for, among other things, three featured articles and five good articles. In addition to the four pool leaders, 12 others (the four second places, and the 8 next highest overall) make up our final 16. The lowest scorer who reached round 4 scored 76 points; a significant increase on the 41 needed to reach round 3. Eight of our semi-finalists scored at least twice as much as this.

No points were awarded this round for featured pictures, good topics or In the News, and no points have been awarded in the whole competition for featured topics, featured portals or featured sounds. Instead, the highest percentage of points has come from good articles. Featured articles, despite their high point cost, are low in number, and so, overall, share a comparable number of points with Did You Know, which are high in number but low in cost. A comparatively small but still considerable number of points come from featured lists and good article reviews, rounding out this round's overall scores.

We would again like to thank Jarry1250 (submissions) and Stone (submissions) for invaluable background work, as well as all of those helping to provide reviews for the articles listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please do keep using it, and please do help by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup.

Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here, for those interested, though it appears that neither are completely accurate at this time. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Moroc-Songhrati-Meads flag.png deletion

This is a legacy from 2009, but...

This file appears to have had GFDL-self properly tagged by the creator / uploader. Why was it deleted with "no permissions"?

Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:24, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Your opinion

Milburn, I have come here to seek your opinion on something. I don't know if you have ever heard of the song "Like a Prayer" by Madonna, well I was developing the article for GA/furture FA here. Can you tell me if the lead is sufficient long/too long for an article of this size? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Leotia lubrica

Calmer Waters 08:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Five and One Hundred Dollar Confederate notes

Hey J, just wanted to note that the scanner has responded to you concerns there. Cheers, Jujutacular ^talk 18:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

• News and notes: Picture of the Year 2010; data challenge; brief news

• In the news: WikiLove roll-out; €25,000 in damages for being removed from Wikipedia; brief news

• WikiProject report: The Star-Spangled WikiProject

• Featured content: Two newly promoted portals

• Arbitration report: Arb resigns while mailing list leaks continue; Motion re: admin

• Technology report: June report: Virginia datacenter, parser, user profiles; WikiLove 1.0; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Like a Prayer

Hey Milburn, thanks for your opinion. The article was moved to mainspace in the link above with proper images and commentary added. What do you think about the whole visual and feel of the article now? Also, would you please check the images used in the article and tell me if they're fine? Thanks beforehands, — Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot milburn, really appreciated. PS, do you know of any German OTRS volunteers round here? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Commons sock

There seems to be some sockpuppetry going on at Commons Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stalking by Teams or Groups-DOJ FOIA Documents-Page1of3.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stalking by Teams or Groups-DOJ FOIA Documents-Page2of3.jpg, and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stalking by Teams or Groups-DOJ FOIA Documents-Page3of3.jpg. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I made Commons:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Elizabeth Blandra and !voted on the three RfDs. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Check user showed there was indeed sockpuppetry with the account on Commons. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:17, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup issues

Shame to see I went out in my absence. Ah well, always next year :) With regard to the update issue, it's because you wiped the pages before you ran the script... I should probably have warned you about that, my bad. I'm going to write another script to virtually revert you, then get the bot to look at these virtual copies without actually touching the pages. Regards, - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 12:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, all done. I have also built protection into the main script to account for running the script just after blanking. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 15:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I think it's just missing "informal" multipliers i.e. double listing. Will have a poke around. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 16:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the code, it never handled that type of mutlipliers. Not sure if I have the time right now to fix that, unfortunately. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 16:08, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on July 10, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 10, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 00:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Lactarius volemus is a species of fungus in the genus Lactarius. It is distributed in warm temperate regions and northern areas of the Northern Hemisphere, and has been collected in Europe, North America, Central America, and Asia. A mycorrhizal fungus, its fruit bodies grow on the ground at the base of various species of trees from summer to autumn, either individually or in groups. It is considered a choice edible mushroom, and is sold in markets in Asia. The colour of the L. volemus mushroom varies from apricot to tawny, and the cap may be up to 11 cm (4.3 in) wide. The pale golden yellow gills on the underside of the cap are closely spaced and sometimes forked. One of the mushroom's most distinctive features is the large amount of latex ("milk") that it exudes when the gills are damaged. It also has a distinctive fishy smell, which does not affect the taste. The mushroom also contains a natural rubber that has been chemically characterized. (more...)

Bernard Levin

hi. This is currently at GAR. I'd like you to review the images and state whether they are OK. I was not convinced by some of the licenses/rationales that they were up to scratch e.g the composites should have attributions to the originals perhaps?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:32, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah using multiple image instead of collage means that they are better res too. Thanks for your swift response on this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Watermarks, copyright symbols, historic photographs

Hi. :) I've got a question on my talk page about what constitutes a proper copyright notice in an old image. I've weighed in, but since images are not my main area was hoping that you might have more information. The question is here. If you can't help out, would you mind letting me know? I'll track down somebody else who may be able to reply. Thanks. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:22, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Family Guy (season 1)/archive2

Responded to your requests. Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 14:42, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Characters of Parks and Recreation

Hey J Milburn, long time no talk. Glad to see the WikiCup is still rolling along and doing well. I saw that you've done some reviews at WP:FLC and was hoping to seek your advice. I've been doing some pretty extensive work on Characters of Parks and Recreation for the last few days, and I think it's nearly ready to be nominated for featured list. However, while I've done several FAs in the past I've never really done an FL, so I was hoping you guys could give me some advice on whether you feel it is ready before I go ahead with it. I plan on reading through the article once or twice more for a grammatical copy edit and to possibly tighten the prose in some areas, but I think the substance of it is mostly complete. I'm not asking for an extensive review or anything, just a glance to see if it looks generally up to par. Let me know, if you get the time. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 16:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks man, much appreciated. I know you're a busy editor! — Hunter Kahn 21:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks so much for the fast response! In response to your #2 comment, the main characters are all characters who were played by regular cast members, as opposed to guest starts. I've added a sentence to the top of that section to clarify that. I've also removed the non-free image and replaced it with a compilation of licensed pictures of the cast which I cropped myself, based on an American Beauty picture that Legolas2186 (talk · contribs) pointed out to me. Let me know if you have any thoughts on that. As for #1, as you point out, I kept the main characters shorter than the others because they each have their own pages. Since I included a link to each main article in those cases, I figured it best to keep them tight, whereas the others have no page so this is the only place to include info for them. But I could take another look through the article and maybe shorten the supporting characters, or add more to the main ones. Thanks again! — Hunter Kahn 23:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

tif to jpg

Wish I knew that. I had to make extra copies instead of overwriting the old small ones. I thought somehow you would want the original version as the conversion might lose something. I guess if I just convert in Paint to .jpg with that work without much loss? Then load over the old small jpgs?

P.s. Sorry to be so lame at this. I really am not a photog, yet.TCO (reviews needed) 00:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I actually Paint a lot for things like that. I checked and it cuts the file size by half, which kinda worries me that there is compression going on that might lose content. I'll get it done. Let me ask at Commons what the best program is.TCO (reviews needed) 00:36, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Preparing_images_for_upload#JPEG_tips might be helpful. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:01, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll get it done. I think any conversion to jpeg will lose some small amount of image although perhaps giving a large reduction in file size. Not at all arguing, but what is the reason for not liking .tifs and is it written somewhere? I don't know much about file formats, just took what I got and saw it was one of our allowed types.TCO (reviews needed) 01:19, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

tifs are typically uploaded so that they can be worked on by our image editors, while jpgs are more accessible to your average Wikipedian. It's in the MoS somewhere, but I really should get to bed, so no time to root, sorry. J Milburn (talk) 01:22, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Thomas Coke

Replied to the review; thanks a bundle. Ironholds (talk) 15:00, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Bad J

The SHAME! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh dear. There's a trouting if ever I deserved one... J Milburn (talk) 19:59, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Haha! (I've done worse, though—I once rolled back the close of the GoCE coordinator elections! Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:06, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Heather Chasen

-Just to let you know Heather Chasen is back on review, you should see the article now! IMBd and filmreference refs are ALL gone! :p MayhemMario 18:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at MayhemMario's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at MayhemMario's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-Under title-RE:Heather Chasen, Thanks MayhemMario 17:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Characters of Parks and Recreation image

An editor has twice replaced my Characters of Parks and Recreation photo collage with the original non-free image. Perhaps you'd like to weigh in on this as the talk page discussion I started. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 04:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Help please.

How would one go about inserting an image into a Wikipedia article? I am a bit of a Rookie and don't have a clue. Please Help! MiJ Kendell (talk) 12:41, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Robert Medley image

Hello, This is about the Robert Medley book cover.

Please just go ahead and delete this image. It's not worth it to me to spend the time figuring out what an appropriate fair use rationale might be. So let's just get rid of it. I've removed the link to it on Robert Medley. No one will miss it. - Macspaunday (talk) 19:47, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Also, please feel free to delete any other image I've uploaded. I simply don't have the time to figure out exactly what you would consider to be a satisfactory fair-use rationale for each of them. I'm sure that Wikipedia will be very much improved by your actions. There's no need to post any warnings on my user page. Just go ahead and delete. - 19:52, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for all the effort you put in to making wikipedia easier to understand. MiJ Kendell (talk) 19:14, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Ironic if you are allergic to cat hair...

MiJ Kendell (talk) 19:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK

Responded to your query on Fort Peck Dam, I think it's over the minimum length now. Shannon⁺º^! 20:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

NikRussian.png

Hi there J Milburn. I've noticed that you've added a {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} template to the image File:NikRussian.png. The template suggests that the best way to fix this problem is to add "an appropriate non-free use rationale, such as Template:Non-free use rationale", but it already has one of those. I felt that the rationale given was sufficient to explain why this particular image was necessary in the Great Reality TV Swindle article. Do you disagree? Thanks very much. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs)

Img review request

Hey. You probably would've gotten to this sooner or later, but would you be able to provide an image review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harmon Killebrew/archive2? Thanks, Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 21:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

• From the editor: Stepping down

• Higher education summit: Wikipedia in Higher Education Summit recap

• News and notes: Wikipedians' surfing habits explored, Sloan Foundation renews $3M grant

• In the news: Britannica and Wikipedia compared; Putin award criticized; possible journalistic sockpuppeting

• WikiProject report: Listening to WikiProject Albums

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Tree shaping case comes to a close

• Technology report: WMF works on its release strategy; secure server problems

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

FP nomination of Les Demoiselles d'Avignon

Hi J Milburn. I just wanted to inform you that Les Demoiselles d'Avignon is up for Featured picture again. The nomination can be found here. I am informing you as you have previously participated in a Featured Picture review of this image, here. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hello! I noticed you're very experienced user of wikipedia and I was wondering if you can clarify one thing for me.
I recently came across this user page. It looks like article and is included into this category used for articles, not user pages. Are users allowed to do such things?
Best,
Invest in knowledge (talk) 14:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Thanks for the lively discussion and updating the map on my userpage; totally forgot I had it linked there! MissMJ (talk) 04:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Fumihiko Maki

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Fumihiko Maki 2010 alt.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 11:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Trade?

Cas and I are working on Paxillus involutus for FAC. The article would benefit from another set of eyes... care to trade a jelly ear review for a roll-rim review? Sasata (talk) 17:31, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Family Guy (season 1)/archive2

Responded to the resquest you gave. Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 19:29, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Query...

I don't suppose you can get access to the following source?

• Mozley, J. H. (1942). "The Collection of Medieval Latin Verse in MS Cotton Titus D.xxiv". Medium Aevum 11: 8.

I need it for the next FAC I'm working on... and hoping to avoid a drive to the nearest university I normally use for this sort of thing... given that we're under a heat warning for the next week. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

It arrived safely. Most of the info went into an explanatory footnote, but it was very helpful to make sure that there wasn't anything of his actually published. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 12:52, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

FURs

My intention was only to try bringing the images into compliance if possible. Since I didn't upload the images nor work on the articles, I could only try to FUR them with the information provided. We hope (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK

Hi, I've reviewed your DYK at the suggestion page. I strongly recommend the hook I suggested; I'm convinced it'll get you loads more views. I was genuinely interested to learn that Hemingway invented that. WilliamH (talk) 21:40, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Great, it's good to go. WilliamH (talk) 11:22, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

• News and notes: WMF Annual plan; Article Feedback tool; university outreach; brief news

• In the news: Fine art; surreptitious sanitation; the politics of kyriarchic marginalization; brief news

• WikiProject report: Earn $$$ free pharm4cy WORK FROM HOME replica watches ViAgRa!!!

• Featured content: Historic last launch of the Space Shuttle Endeavour; Teddy Roosevelt's threat to behead official; 18th-century London sex manual

• Arbitration report: Motion passed to amend 2008 case: topic ban and reminder

• Technology report: Code Review backlog almost zero; What is: Subversion?; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:46, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of One Voice (Andrew Johnston album)

The article One Voice (Andrew Johnston album) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:One Voice (Andrew Johnston album) for things which need to be addressed. My76Strat ^talk 14:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harold Pinter/archive1 which helped in the process of getting this article to FA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:38, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Ted Bundy Image Issues

Hello, J Milburn! I really don't think the issue with the Florida archives needs to derail this FAC, and as I've stated before, the issue with the archives goes well beyond the scope of this article. There are over 167,000 images in the archives, and this would affect all of them and their use here on WP. This is a Commons issue and an issue with the archives. I will be taking the lead on this aspect: what do you need me to do to help resolve this? I will contact the Florida site, I will contact Andy Dingley - I'll contact whomever will resolve this issue. Rather than spread this over the FAC nomination page and Vidor's talk page, let's centralize this here (if that's okay). Cheers :> Doc talk 02:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Request for Adminship

Hello J Milburn, I need to know that can I be a full administrator in around this year or 2013? The problem is that I read the admin ship and I really don't know what I'm doing. I created 3 new articles this year and one last year. I edited over 500 articles plus 50 articles outside the English Wikipedia such as French and German. Can this standards fit into the Wikipedia admin ship? Please leave me a message at my talk page --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 02:12, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you J Milburn, If I make a over 1000+ edits and do some Wikipedia tasks such as adding pages, photos or redirects, would it be acceptable for an adminship next year or next six months. What happens if I nominate myself in the admin page as of now? Is it good or not good. I would like to be a Wikipedia Administrator because, I have been writing blogs since 2006. I understand my mistakes and I really get it. If if does not work, would I be nominating myself in around 2013 or 2015. The page I created is not my fault "Andkon Arcade" my brother accessed Wikipedia and goes to the computer types random information of the new page then I can't have a chance to be one and I don't know why the page is nominated for deletion. --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 23:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making One Voice (Andrew Johnston album) a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. Thanks also for your reviews. Featured article candidates and Good Article nominees always need more reviewers! All the best, – Quadell (talk)

WikiCup question

I've recently been reading about the WikiCup and was wondering when the next WikiCup will take place and when I can sign up for it. Thanks. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 07:08, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I can't wait for the next WikiCup! - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 05:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Photomontage (Forggensee Panorama)

Hi, I've made some corrections to File:Photomontage (Forggensee Panorama).jpg, please see how is it and tell your opinion at FPC if possible, thank you.   ■ MMXX  ^talk  12:12, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Family Guy (season 1)/archive2

I have resolved your issues on the subject of the image, please respond. Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 03:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Inocybe godeyi

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ten Thousand Miles of the Yangtze River

Re: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ten Thousand Miles of the Yangtze River

I agree that it should not have been promoted based on the responses given. However the opposition all seemed to center around placement/EV issues. If/When those issues are addressed, which I don't forsee happening for a few months, would there be anything preventing me from renominating it? I don't know FP policy/customs very well, hence me asking. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:55, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Reviewing GA-nominees on video games

hi, I nominated a couple of video game articles as GA and I was wondering if it'd be possible if you could review either the Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars article or the Super Mario Galaxy 2 article, thanks—SCB '92 (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

• Wikimedian in Residence interview: Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science: an interview with Daniel Mietchen

• News and notes: Oral citations; the state of global development; a gentler Huggle; brief news

• In the news: Open access clash with copyright; rising reader satisfaction; the wiki-correlates of geopolitical instability; brief news

• Recent research: Talk page interactions; Wikipedia at the Open Knowledge Conference; Summer of Research

• WikiProject report: Musing with WikiProject Philosophy

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: New case opened; hyphens and dashes update; motion

• Technology report: Protocol-relative URLs; GSoC updates; bad news for SMW fans; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Got a question for you

How much work would it take to get File:Delaware (BB28). Starboard bow, Guantanamo Bay, 01-01-1920 - NARA - 512950.jpg to FP? And did I adjust the brightness and contrast correctly from the original TIFF? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the answers. I might try PPR after doing a little more cleanup. Thanks! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:18, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Image on Meat dress of Lady Gaga

Hi there, could you have a look at the new image at Meat dress of Lady Gaga and let me know if you think this one is more suitable regards NFCC? It's currently undergoing a GA review by a new reviewer and they aren't as familiar with image rules (not that I am either - I mostly work to the mantra that if it was published prior to 1923 or on Commons then it's fine!). Anyway, I'd appreciate it if you could take a gander and if you think it's ok, if you could just post a note on the GA review? Thanks, Miyagawa (talk) 20:02, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

• News and notes: Wikimania; why Board of Trustees elections attract few votes; brief news

• In the news: Consensus of Wikipedia authors questioned about Shakespeare authorship; 10 biggest edit wars on Wikipedia; brief news

• Research interview: The Huggle Experiment: interview with the research team

• WikiProject report: Little Project, Big Heart — WikiProject Croatia

• Featured content: Featured pictures is back in town

• Arbitration report: Proposed decision submitted for one case

• Technology report: Developers descend on Haifa; wikitech-l discussions; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:05, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Typhula quisquiliaris

I double-checked MycoBank (complicated by the fact the link you have at T. quisquiliaris is for the name Leotia lubrica...) and what happens is that MycoBank has the wrong interpretation of "Basionym" (ICBN: "A previously published legitimate name-bringing or epithet-bringing synonym from which a new name is formed for a taxon of different rank or position."). Clavaria obtusa is what we might call the "type-bringing name" and C. quisquiliaris is not a sancionned "originally unnecessary" substitute, but in fact a valid nomen novum, because C. obtusa was already extent when Sowerby coins it , and later sanctioned by Persoon (no idea if Fries knew Persoon's name, but it's likely I'd guess), and that nomen novum aspect was absent from the article. Circéus (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Death in the Afternoon (cocktail)

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 00:03, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

GAN review of Olaf the Black

Hello. Thanks alot for the thorough review. I've being going through your points for the last while, and I'm working on it right now. I'll let you know when I've addressed them all.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 08:54, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've got to all points.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 10:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Typhula quisquiliaris

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit
		For your great and thorough reviews at WP:GAN. They're always appreciated! Theleftorium (talk) 14:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Here We Go Again (Ray Charles song)/archive1

Would you care to comment on my changes at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Here We Go Again (Ray Charles song)/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:25, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Frecce Tricolori

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Frecce Tricolori RIAT 2011.JPG, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 20:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Peniophora quercina

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 00:03, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Ducie Island

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at Talk:Ducie Island/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GDuwenTell me! 23:00, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I have work on most of the points of your last request, I will take care of the of the rest of them in a few days. BTW I have added all the bird species of the island, I have named it with their scientific name.--GDuwenTell me! 02:05, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at Talk:Ducie Island/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GDuwenTell me! 18:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I need help to access this article of the JSTOR, it would be useful to clarify why the U.S did not take the possession of the island, as it is the only source that I could find that relates Ducie to the Guano Islands act. Thanks!--GDuwenTell me! 22:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, J Milburn. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--GDuwenTell me! 22:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

After some work, the article is now ready for a new look. I didn't answer before because I had to add some more information.--GDuwenTell me! 15:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at Talk:Ducie Island/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GDuwenTell me! 17:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I completed your new requests, waiting for more.--GDuwenTell me! 21:20, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at Talk:Ducie Island/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GDuwenTell me! 23:12, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at Talk:Ducie Island/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--GDuwenTell me! 15:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Cup

Please withdraw me from the WikiCup, as I am retiring from Wikipedia. Thanks for your co-ordination of the Cup, it's much appreciated. 02:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

J, I did this but I'm not sure if the bot will overwrite me. Adabow, thanks for your hard work, and I hope you decide to return sometime. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

That's what needed to be done- I've also updated the contestant list. Sorry to see you go Adabow, I hope you feel able to return at some point. J Milburn (talk) 12:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

• Wikimania: Seventh annual Wikimedia conference concluded in Haifa, Israel

• News and notes: Wikimania a success; board letter controversial; and evidence showing bitten newbies don't stay

• In the news: Israeli news focuses on Wikimania; worldwide coverage of contributor decline and gender gap; brief news

• WikiProject report: Shooting the breeze with WikiProject Firearms

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Manipulation of BLPs case opened; one case comes to a close

• Technology report: Wikimania technology roundup; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Phantasmal poison frog

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Epipedobates-tricolor-dreistreifen-baumsteiger.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Fallschirmjäger ✉ 18:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius badiolaevis

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	You did it again!
	Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making Typhula quisquiliaris a certified "Good Article"! From classical music to club fungus, you're there to bring articles to GA quality. Thank you again; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Ooooh, and Peniophora quercina made GA status too! Congrats again! – Quadell ^(talk) 14:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

The Good-Morrow

Hey; we've fixed up most of what you were concerned with. Care to take another look? Ironholds (talk) 16:30, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Okie-dokes; I had sorta-replied to the first point (not sure if you saw it, though) and have now addressed the last two. Let me know what you think. Ironholds (talk) 16:40, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Please send copy of deleted page - International Social Service Australia

Hi J Milburn, a page I recently created called International Social Service Australia was deleted on the grounds of it being unambiguous advertising. Could you send me a copy please (userfy) or email me a copy (fionns@gmail.com). You ask for a link to the page, even if deleted, but not sure what that means sorry - ie. not sure how to link to a deleted page. Thanks, FionnSkiotis (talk) 23:26, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Olaf and Harald

	Olaf and Harald
	Hello. Thanks again for the reviews for these two. It's been fun working on them and making adjustments and all. :) I really appreciate the time you spent on the reviews. Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 06:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

• Women and Wikipedia: New Research, WikiChix

• News and notes: Chapter funding and what skeptics and Latter Day Saints have in common

• In the news: Wikipedia a "sausage fest", Chicago Wikipedians ("the people you've probably plagiarized"), and other silly season stories

• WikiProject report: The Oregonians

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Abortion case opened, two more still in progress

• Technology report: Forks, upload slowness and mobile redirection

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Beat of My Drum GA

Thanks a lot for taking on the review. I understand at points my prose isn't great so thanks for detailing it all. I just wanted to thank you for copy-editing some of the article, I learnt quite a lot through your review already. But it's going to take a bit of time for me to get through it all, Thanks again --FeuDeJoie (talk) 23:17, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Good fungus (wow!)

		The Bio-star
		Thanks so much for bringing all those fungus-related articles up to GA status! (Your latest was the Chinese Giant, Fomitiporia ellipsoidea.) Your output and dedication are impressive. Well done! – Quadell (talk) 23:26, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Gaylussacia brachycera

The box huckleberry is ready for another look, I think. A new publication just showed up on Google Scholar that had a significant impact on the age claims. Thanks for all your help. Choess (talk) 00:32, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Archaeorhizomyces

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 16:03, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Santa's Little Helper/GA1

I've left some questions at the GAR. Not sure if you've seen them or not. Theleftorium ^(talk) 19:35, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

• News and notes: Girl Geeks edit while they dine, candidates needed for forthcoming steward elections, image referendum opens

• In the news: Journalist regrets not checking citation, PR firms issue advice on how to "survive" Wikipedia (but U.S. Congressman caught red-handed)

• WikiProject report: Images in Motion – WikiProject Animation

• Featured content: JJ Harrison on avian photography

• Arbitration report: After eleven moves, name for islands now under arbitration

• Technology report: Engineering report, sprint, and more testers needed

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Sesame Street

JM, about your edit here: [3] You call yourself an expert on images, so my question is an honest one. Images on Wikipedia have always been my nemesis as an editor. In your edit, you removed the image of Joe Raposo, stating in your edit summary that what he looked like isn't important. You kept however, an image of Jim Henson later in the article. Wouldn't we have to remove Henson's image for the same reason? You understand the risk I'm taking in asking the question, because you might as well decide that Henson's image doesn't belong there, either, and remove it, too. See, I've had a horrible time with images in Sesame Street-related articles, mostly for copyright reasons and because Sesame Workshop is notoriously protective of their characters, for good reason. If you have any suggestions for me regarding how to deal with that, I'd appreciate it. Christine (talk) 21:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Farseekers

On review of Wikipedia's image policy (thank you for linking it), I do agree with your view as to the image table and will now do the same for my other book articles. Thank you for your input. --Limolover (talk) 09:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Bye!

		The Special Barnstar
		I am really upset that im having to say this, but I am leaving. I hope I ahve left with dignity and pride and that your always remember me. You have been a true friend, and a role model. ^___^ MayhemMario 15:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

• News and notes: Abuse filter on all Wikimedia sites; Foundation's report for July; editor survey results

• In the news: Wikipedia praised for disaster news coverage, scolded for left-wing bias; brief news

• Recent research: Article promotion by collaboration; deleted revisions; Wikipedia's use of open access; readers unimpressed by FAs; swine flu anxiety

• Opinion essay: How an attempt to answer one question turned into a quagmire

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Tennis

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Four existing cases

• Technology report: The bugosphere, new mobile site and MediaWiki 1.18 close in on deployment

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Ping

Hi J Milburn. I've responded to your comment on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Moonrise (novel)/archive1. Please feel free to respond and comment further. Brambleclawx 14:30, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

John Bernard Riley article issues

Hi. Sorry, here's another article. If you check the history of John Bernard Riley, the drummer obviously began the "biography" about himself. I really am strongly opposed to allowing the subject of any "biography" edit it because (at least in "my world" that's called an autobiography)! Anyway, there's far too much POV in the article. The photo was uploaded by the subject, and only one other person has been editing uninterrupted who I believe to be the same guy. Whoever it is doesn't know what does and doesn't belong in an autobiography -- I mean, "biography" there. As an Admin., please see his official website, the ONE reference, and how closely it resembles the text that is there, etc. I think it needs to be tagged that the article may be being edited by either the subject or someone who works closely with him- you know the banner, right? I'm so tired of seeing the Wikipedia being used as a vehicle for promotion rather than respected as a free online encyclopedia! Please reply on my talk page, OK? Thanks. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 01:12, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

oops. Accidentally bumped the mouse and the same message was sent twice to you. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 01:14, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Well, yeah, I do a LOT of Wikignome stuff, since I found my "calling" in finding musician's photos a few years ago. I do more infobox building, copy editing, and the like. However, I've been noticing primarily on jazz biographies (and those of people from Canada, for some reason) in particular, that other experienced editors have trotted through ahead of me without wondering why the wording doesn't reflect the WP:NPOV mandate, and sounds a little too polished for a stub. I ran into the musician-trying-to-edit-and-determine-what-he-wants-on-his-article issue already once from a casual acquaintance whose name I can't even mention in Wikipedia anymore, though obviously, you can look it up, but it's part of why I question posed photos in general, too. I do tag a lot of articles, but when it comes to a nomination for deletion, or whatever, I defer to the Admins. Thanks for being there for the rest of us! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Uber fan going on adding non-free content

J, I would like your opinion on something. I was checking the Madonna articles and found that the non-GA articles all have umpteen number of song samples, for which there's either no NFCC rationale or there's no increase for the reader's understanding and samples being added simply for decoration. I have started removing wherever applicable, however the uploader of the samples, a user called Alecsdaniel (talk · contribs) is going on adding them, claiming that the faux rationale on the sample page is enough. I have tried to explain here to the user, but I don't think he/she quite grasps it. What shall I do in this case? The user obviously doesnot mean harm, but we cannot allow so much of non-free samples. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:11, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Gaylussacia brachycera

Thanks for all your help in getting this promoted to Good Article, carefully prying out all the little inconsistencies I overlooked. With your help, it's at least a huckleberry over my persimmon. Choess (talk) 02:56, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

OTRS

Just thought I would let you know OTRS:2011082910011989 looks to be for you. Thought I would let you know. -- DQ (t) (e) 20:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Bringing constant vandalism to your attention. Why has this contributor never been blocked?

User 99.129.20.130 has many edits listed on his page that cannot be anything other than intentional vandalism. In fact I could not find anything else among his contributions. How is it that he has never been blocked?1archie99 (talk) 04:22, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

This particular IP is registered to a mobile phone provider and, per the notice on the IP's talkpage "can be used by many of its customers" so these edits are probably not from a single user. And it has been blocked for certain periods of time, as the block log and the IP's talkpage User talk:99.129.20.130 prove. Shearonink (talk) 04:38, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

IP addresses rarely get blocked long term, as they are often shared by multiple users. That particular user hasn't even received any recent warnings- the only thing that can really be done is to warn when there is vandalism, then report to AIV. To have anything like a long term solution, there would have to be a a change in practice. J Milburn (talk) 09:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Since it appears that this phone provider seems to attract nothing but vandalizers, warnings have no effect; I see no reason for not permanently blocking this ip address. If a change in practice is required to permanently block this ip, it should happen. What is AIV?1archie99 (talk) 13:54, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

That's not really my area, to be honest, but, as I say, indefinite blocks for IP addresses are not generally used, other than for open proxies, the logic being that many different people will use most addresses- certainly the case here. AIV is admistrator intervention against vandalism; it's where unambiguous vandals are reported to administrators for blocking. J Milburn (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

• News and notes: 24,000 votes later and community position on image filter still unclear; first index of editor satisfaction appears positive

• In the news: Britannica and Wikipedia like "apples and chairs"; should anyone who's anyone get an article?; and why fighting and barriers to editing may be useful after all

• WikiProject report: Riding with WikiProject London Transport

• Sister projects: Wiki Loves Monuments 2011

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Opinion essay: The copyright crisis, and why we should care

• Arbitration report: BLP case closed; Cirt-Jayen466 nearly there; AUSC reshuffle

• Technology report: Pencils down in Google Summer of Code, August analysed and integrated HTTPS support in action

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:59, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Theunknownnun/Archive

User is now regularly creating socks in order to continue editing pages of child actresses. If you can, do keep any pages he has edited on your watchlist - any new edits might be by new socks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:20, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Photo upload

The photographer is a co-worker of mine who granted permission for the article to be openly used in the article. Please just direct me to whatever copyright permissions will allow the photo to be shared on the page? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ShowClix

DYK for Marasmius funalis

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Elizabeth II

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at DrKiernan's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Panos Papoutsis

Dear Mr. Milburn, I am contacting you in relation to the problem I have encountered while uploading 3 images (there are a couple more I have uploaded but these will not go on the wikipage I am creating): http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Panos_Papoutsis&diff=0&oldid=448744042 1) 'DAIS' Doukas School Cultural & Athletic Centre.JPG 2) Doukas Logo.jpg 3) Tablet-PC use in School.jpg

I have been assigned to create a page for the School I work for. Everything is ready, apart from the images. I appreciate your comments on one of the images. However, I must admit, I am totally lost right now, as I am trying a couple of days to understand how I could correct my mistakes in uploading these 3 images and save all changes, but I cannot... I cannot even delete these 3 images and upload them again correctly. There is so much complex text/instructions I need to read and I altough I tried to follow, I could not make out what to do. The status is the same for all 3 for them: Summary: School of the Future (Doukas School, Athens, Greece), www.doukas.gr Licence: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Could you please help me? How could I insert these data in these 3 images? Could you insert this data? Or could you send me the relevant steps/commands, so I could then just copy paste these commands in the relevant fields? Also, I would like to change the name of one images from "Tablet-PC use in School.jpg" to Tablet-PC Use in the Classroom of the Future.jpg"? Thank you in advance for your help. I really appreciate it. Kind regards, Panos Papoutsis Project Manager Doukas School Email: panos.papoutsis@doukas.gr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panos Papoutsis (talk • contribs) 07:52, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Milburn, thank you for your rapid response.

I have taken the Neutral Point of View (NPOV) very seriously, while editing the article, with multiple edits over a period of 1 month, by also studying very carefully multiple other related articles. So I personally do not have any worries on this very important issue for Wikipedia. I am sure other viewers of Wikipedia can confirm it too in the future, by also comparing this article with other related articles (School of the Future) that exist in Wikipedia. In fact, I believe that my article is much more wikified than the others that already exist.

As far as the 3 images are concerned, the 2 images (1. 'DAIS' Doukas School Cultural & Athletic Centre.JPG , 2. Tablet-PC use in School.jpg) were created by a colleague of mine at Doukas School. The 1 image is the School Logo (Doukas Logo.jpg), so it is the ownership of the institution.

So, would you be kind enough to tell me, 1) if I can use Doukas Logo. jpg at least 2) What should I insert so as to change the Summary and Licence of the image as follows:

Summary: School of the Future (Doukas School, Athens, Greece), www.doukas.gr , Licence: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

Thank you again for your valuable help, Panos Papoutsis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panos Papoutsis (talk • contribs) 13:09, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Milburn, I really appreciate your help. I will contact the owner (Mr. Vassileios Economu) of the 2 images and I will shortly provide you with his email address. I will let him know to prepare an email so as to send it to you and confirm the licence of these images. In the meantime, I have published my article under the title: "School of the Future (Doukas School, Athens, Greece)". If you have any further suggestions, you are more than welcome. Best regards, Panos Papoutsis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panos Papoutsis (talk • contribs) 14:03, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

FYI

If you are interested in fungi in Japan, this page might be helpful. Oda Mari (talk) 15:28, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

photos on hepburn page

Hello, about the Katharine Hepburn page - from what I can see of the non-free content guidelines, it is fine to use a screenshot so long as it is relevant and low quality. It doesn't say anything about there being a maximum amount you can use on one page..? I think I need the problem to be clarified please. Thanks. (also, a lot of the pictures are free because they're from trailers/promo pics) --Lobo512 (talk) 20:53, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Hmm, I've just read so many other 'justifications' along the lines of what I've done that I figured it was okay. I'm okay with deleting the Little Women one as it is pretty low quality anyway. The pic from for On Golden Pond, I actually did take that from the film's trailer - does that make it okay? I just wasn't sure if it is free or not because the licencing attached with similar pics says 'taken between *something* and 1977'...but that licensing lable isn't specific for trailers, are trailers from any year acceptable? And I guess I wouldn't miss the Alice Adams one much, and I can probably find a trailer for it somewhere and get a shot from that...that would leave only 3 non-free? And I'll tighten the justifications? --Lobo512 (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Hiya, I just wanted to point something out to you - if you look at the article on Only Fools and Horses, it uses four non-free screenshots, all of which have the following rationale:

   1. No free alternative exists.
   2. It is of a low resolution, meaning copies made from it will be of poor quality.
   3. It does not limit the copyright holder's ability to profit from the work.
   4. This image (and similar ones) is already widely used on the internet, so using it on Wikipedia does not make it significantly more accessible.

Such basic reasoning was deemed acceptable for that page, and it has been rated FA... --Lobo512 (talk) 10:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Well I guess that is an annoying argument I gave, but you can understand how the double-standards on wiki (which I know are unavoidable) can be frustrating. About the Philadelphia Story picture, I know that I've thought of the rationale afterwards but that doesn't make it illegitimate. The Berg biography says "...and Adrian - who designed clothes for Garbo - created the costumes, each one of Hepburn's outfits a vision...Hepburn had never looked more glamorous nor been more commanding." It seems to me that her appearance in the film was a genuine factor in re-gaining her popularity. I didn't think to comment on it until this issue came up, but I do think that's a genuinely interesting thing to mention. Even if the picture can't stay, I'm going to add that. --Lobo512 (talk) 12:10, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup

Hi J, since I cannot submit my 10+ GA this round, what can I do so my work can be taken into account at that Jarry tool thingy? Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 23:16, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Can I claim the points during this round, but they won't be taken into contention at the end of the comp? Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 00:11, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Featured Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Fomitiporia ellipsoidea a Featured Article! Please accept this barnstar. Your work is much appreciated. – Quadell (talk) 12:26, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

• News and notes: Foundation reports on research, Kenya trip, Mumbai Wikiconference; Canada, Hungary and Estonia; English Wikinews forked

• In the news: 9/11 coverage, Wikimedia hypothetically rebranded and Wikipedia golf 2.0

• WikiProject report: Politics in the Pacific: WikiProject Australian Politics

• Featured content: Wikipedians explain two new featured pictures

• Arbitration report: Ohconfucius sanctions removed, Cirt desysopped 6:5 and a call for CU/OS applications

• Technology report: What is: agile development? and new mobile site goes live

• Opinion essay: The Walrus and the Carpenter

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, J Milburn. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Triple Crown/Nominations.
Message added 08:58, 13 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SMasters (talk) 08:58, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Re a comment of yours

re "I note that there have been repeated discussions about the need for the list of countries of which Elizabeth is monarch in the first sentence. I have my own opinion about the issue, but it's not really my place as a GA reviewer to express them." - While I'd agree it's not your place to express them, would you be willing to offer them off the article's talk page? NickCT (talk) 18:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Military Photo of Amon Göth

Dear Mr. Milburn,

For one reason or another, there seems to be a concern for the uploading of the photo File:AmonGöth1943.jpg. The military photo is linked to the article Amon Göth and is licensed as such under the file. If there is any other issues, or if there needs to be more information listed underneath the uploaded file, please let me know. ~ Folklore777 (talk) 02:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Connie Talbot's Holiday Magic

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Beat of My Drum GA

Hiya, is there anything else I can do for the Beat of My Drum GA? Thanks, --FeuDeJoie (talk) 16:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks... There's no rush, I was just wondering :) --FeuDeJoie (talk) 16:11, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

FAC review of "Mothers of the Disappeared"

Hi J Milburn, thanks very much for your FAC review of "Mothers of the Disappeared". I've finally found some time to respond to the various comments there, and I think I've addressed the point you brought up regarding the cleanup of File:Que digan dónde estan.jpg. I'd greatly appreciate you checking back to see if I have done so adequately when you have a spare minute or two. Thank you very much again! :-) Melicans (talk, contributions) 04:13, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Honey fungus

Hi JM, how do you feel moving honey fungus to Armillaria? I'd do it myself but it needs someone with more buttons. Sasata (talk) 20:44, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Marrus orthocanna

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Marrus orthocanna crop.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 00:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

• From the editor: Changes to The Signpost

• News and notes: Ushahidi research tool announced, Citizendium five years on: success or failure?, and Wikimedia DC officially recognised

• In the news: Wikipedia: yesterday's news? Calls for women, doctors, and scholars of humanities; Wales makes Wikimedia work "look easy"

• Sister projects: On the Wikinews fork

• WikiProject report: Back to school

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: ArbCom narrowly rejects application to open new case

• Technology report: MediaWiki 1.18 deployment begins, the alleged "injustice" of WMF engineering policy, and Wikimedians warned of imminent fix to magic word

• Popular pages: Article stats for the English Wikipedia in the last year

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:49, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Comic strip art

I have deleted the offending strips you cited. The Jerry on the Job single b/w panel is obviously a satisfactory solution to the reduction problem. I never knew about the nobots tag, but someone suggested it to me as another positive solution. As an artist, I have always looked at comic strips as a welding of narrative and image. It is sequential art, and each panel delivers information even if minus balloons and captions. The upload of a comic book cover can convey a character and ditto a single panel, but a full page of the interior is needed to show the artist's approach to sequential art layout/design relevant to the storytelling. Sunday comic strips of the 1930s are a challenge because they were printed in very large eight-column newspapers. As a result of this, those huge Sunday strips have rarely been seen to a similar effect in books, magazines, films, DVDs and digital reproduction, leaving young comic book readers unaware of the comic strips that inspired the later comic book artists. Wikipedia is ideal for keeping this history alive at a time when the newspaper industry is collapsing. Yet there are curious contradictions in the presentation of artwork on Wikipedia where a famous painting by Goya weighs in at 85 MB. A 1930s Sunday page might be as large as a familiar oil painting, but its encyclopedic message is diminished if it is reduced until lettering is illegible or if only a portion is chipped off for repro. This is not unlike the demonstrations of pan-and-scan vs. letter-boxed films sometimes seen on TCM. As per requests, I have reduced numerous strips, but I'm left hanging, twisting in the wind, when successive reductions make the dialog difficult to read. In the many hours doing digital strip restoration, the goal is to take a brown, crumbling newsprint page and make it more legible! Pepso2 (talk) 17:52, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, J. As a disinterested third party, who has found Pepso2 a diligent and meticulous editor of article prose for years now, I can't say he is any any less diligent and meticulous where it comes to use of comic-strip art. One-size-fits-all isn't always the most useful thumbnail given the very wide spectrum of art and story formats. Comic strips — a uniquely condensed narrative in which words and pictures are by the nature of the form inextricably linked in order to tell a short complete story — are like no other form. They are different from comic books, which have representational covers that serve the same role in comic-book articles as do movie posters in Wikipedia articles about movies. Comic strips have no analog to that.

To truncate a Sunday page by a master comic-book storyteller like Windsor McCay or Milton Caniff is to provide an incomplete and amateurish-looking image of their work — which, if not actually belittling or demeaning them as artists certainly to provide a questionable, example of their work, making them seem incapable of completing a comedic or dramatic thought. Ultimately, and encyclopedically, this gives a false and inaccurate impression of the article subject.

We would not show just the top half of Annunciation at Leonardo da Vinci. Splitting up a McCay of Caniff Sunday page is no less a desecration of the work.

"Minimal extent of use" says, "An entire work is not used if a portion will suffice." Unless we believe that the comic strip work of artists like McCay, Caniff, Hal Foster, Alex Raymond, Charles Schulz and others are "trash art" not worthy of the same consideration as fine art, we would no more consider a truncated portion of a Sunday page than we would a truncated portion of Annunciation. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:29, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

We choose only specific parts of poems, and upload only parts of songs, too. They are more accurate comparisons to comic strips, rather than works of fine art. Pulling the "comic strips should have different rules to everything else" card isn't really gonna wash with that many people. J Milburn (talk) 18:58, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. Just to clarity, I'm not saying comic strips should have different rules. I'm saying popular visual art (songs and poems aren't visual art) should have the same rules as fine visual art. We show all of Michelangelo's David — from four angles, as befits such a singular work — and have an entire gallery of Claes Oldenburg's massive sculptures, all seen in full.

If it's Wikipedia consensus that a Sunday comic-strip page — which is consciously designed by an artist to be a complete image and story — is trash art and undeserving of the same consideration as fine art, which Wikipedia depicts in its entirety, then of course, we all go along with consensus. But please don't say anyone's asking for an exception when one is asking for the same rights as afforded elsewhere. To give an analogy, gays aren't asking for an exception for the right to marry — they're asking to be given the same rights as others. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I misinterpretted, but when you said "One-size-fits-all isn't always the most useful thumbnail given the very wide spectrum of art and story formats. Comic strips — a uniquely condensed narrative in which words and pictures are by the nature of the form inextricably linked in order to tell a short complete story — are like no other form." I got the impression that you were arguing that comic strips should be treated differently, as they are "unique", and "like no other form". Now, I'm not sure to what extent you appreciate this (some of the examples suggest that you do not, perhaps, to its fullest) but Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia, and our use of non-free content, while permitted in some cases, is governed by deliberately extremely strict rules for inclusion. We need to aim to minimise the amount of non-free content we use- yes, a comic is designed to be a whole, but so is a song, or a poem, or a novel, or a television episode. We are not here to distribute these things- we're here to write about them. When using non-free content, we must ask what we are using it to show- if we continue the idea of comics as art forms (I have no interest in entering into a pseudophilosophical debate about the nature of art- our opinions on whether comics are "fine art" are irrelevant) then we are attempting to show the artistic style; something which could be achieved with only a few frames. Equally, in an article on an artist or a series of paintings, we would show only a few of them (if non-free). If you are attempting to use the non-free comic to show the whole narrative, then, with respect, you are using non-free content in the wrong way. J Milburn (talk) 21:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I have to admit I'm perplexed by your speaking down to me. "Pseudophilosophical"? I'm afraid I'm not faking my educated background.

A Sunday page is, like a painting, a single image in time, making it unlike a song or a multi-page story. And because it is a marriage of image and words, showing a single panel gives no more insight into the self-contained work that would showing just the top half of a painting.

We show full images of paintings, which are one-of-a-kind. Yet not a full image of a Sunday page, which is one of 52 a year or one of hundreds in a few years. It seems more a copyright danger to show the full image of a one-of-a-kind painting. I'm not sure I see the rationale for allowing that, and not for allowing a Sunday comics page. One could certainly show Da Vinci's art with just the left half of Annunciation. May I simply ask you to consider these points with reasonable respect and not dismiss them, as a word like "pseudophilosophical" suggests?--Tenebrae (talk) 23:15, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I didn't mean to speak down to you. The point is, discussing the nature of comic strips and debating the nature of "fine art" is not going to get us anywhere, nor is it relevant. That is what I described as "pseudophilosophical"- I did not mean to attack your credentials, as I have no idea what they are. (I am a philosopher, if it does not sound too pompous for me to self-identify as such, but I'm interested mostly in ethics and political philosophy. Not that that matters.) You're still not seeming to follow what I am saying. I'm dropping the attempts to compare comic strips to books or songs- you're clearly not buying it. Equally, I'm really not buying your comparison to paintings, and I have explained why. At no point have I said that we face any kind of "copyright danger"- I am talking about our non-free content criteria. I'm not a lawyer, and I've no interest in pretending to be one, and so I'm not going to try and assess "copyright danger". We have our non-free content criteria, and any discussion about non-free content must be framed within them- "copyright danger", "fine art" and "single image[s] in time" do not necessarily feature. If you want to defend a particular usage of a particular image, or criticise one of my edits, please do so with reference to the non-free content criteria. They're the important thing here. J Milburn (talk) 23:26, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate your thoughtful response; it's genuinely nice to speak with another mature adult on Wikipedia, which tends to skew young. Let me try to ask a stripped-down question and see if we can build from there: According to the criteria, what is the pertinent difference between a full painting and a full Sunday comic strip? --Tenebrae (talk) 23:52, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Nothing. Both are non-free images, and both need to meet the criteria. The relevant question is about the usage of the images. We have to ask what each image is being used for. For a point of comparison, let's take Campbell's Soup Cans- a famous and non-free painting on which we have a featured article. Also, I'm sure you can see convenient paralell between this and a full-page comic-strip. Now, that article would clearly be lacking without the picture- it's an article about the picture. When an image of a comic strip is used, it is rarely in the same context- if we had an article on a particular strip (perhaps the last ever Calvin and Hobbes strip would have enough analysis to support an article) then, yes, the usage would be very close to that of the lead image in the Calvin's Soup Cans article. Instead, however, comic strip images are typically given as examples. Precisely what they're examples of varies by use- it may be an example of a particular artist's work, it may be an example of a particular comic, it may even be an example of a certain brand of humour. There are, of course, other possibilities. Let's say it's an example of a particular artist's work, for use in the biography of that artist. Clearly, such an example may well be justified- for instance, there may be sourced discussion of the artist's particular artistic style- use of colour, use of shapes, use of backdrops- I'm sure you're more familiar with this than I am. In such a case, we should seek an illustrative example, but when doing so, one of our concerns has to be minimising the amount of non-free content we use. In such a case, a single frame would probably be enough. (Not a great example, as it's a free image, but...) If I wanted to illustrate the particular style (discussed in his biography) of the xkcd artist, File:Xkcd philosophy.png would surely be sufficient- clearly, it's a typical example. Just look at the most recent comic. I would not be looking to use something like this, it's just plain excessive.

Of course, the tricky thing about this is that it has to be done on a case-by-case basis- some points are going to require more to illustrate. For instance, if we had some sourced discussion about a comic's complex sense of humour, and this really needed to be illustrated, several panels may be required. However, it's surely very rare that whole page scans are going to be required for illustration. You mentioned earlier that comic strips have no "representing" image, in the same way a book cover serves to represent the entire book, but this is surely not always true- take problem image File:Princevaliant61745.jpg. The comic as a whole could surely be represented by the logo used in the first panel. Of course, further images may be required further down- a single panel to illustrate the distinctive art, a second panel to illustrate gratuitous violence... Perhaps they could even be the same panel. The distinctive way monologues are used in the comic... I'm making this all up, of course, I don't know the comic. We have to be careful with our use of non-free content, and sometimes it is going to be needed, perhaps even in large amounts. But scanning whole comics and uploading them to our articles at a high resolution is not the answer- at best, it's clumsy, and at worst, straight up contrary to our policies. J Milburn (talk) 00:21, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate your understanding that need for a case-by-case basis (which is what I meant, perhaps with too-clumsy shorthand, when I said a one-size-fits-all approach may not be the most appropriate). We're on the same page with that; no question. The examples provided are problematic, though for different reasons; the Prince Valiant page actually includes both the Prince Valiant strip and a second strip along the bottom (called a "topper" strip, since they generally appeared on top; they're no longer used). The stick-figure strips (are they yours? very imaginative way of providing examples!) I think actually indicate the need for something more complete than a single panel in order to give a full understanding of what how the strip looks and reads.

I agree that too many times people use images decoratively; I've removed many for that reason myself. I — and I'm sure Pepso2, who really is knowledgeable about old comic strips and writers/artists, and members of WikiProject Comics in general — are grateful for your endeavoring to understand the particular, inextricable text/image marriage of comic strips, and that we can try to do the best we can for comic strip articles by looking at the insertion of a single image on a case-by-case basis. With all sincerity, thank you. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Yet another aspect: A vast array of old radio programs, old films, comic book stories and other pop culture from the 20th century is now on the Internet. Not so with old color comic strips. I think the reason is partially ignorance of the artistry and the fact that many do not have large scanners or the time/ability/resources to scan in portions and piece them together. Thus, Wikipedia's display of vintage comic strips is far from "decorative". It is an encyclopedic detailing of a vanished artform inaccessible or unknown to millions of online users. Pepso2 (talk) 15:34, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Pepso, that is utterly, utterly irrelevant. We are not here to distribute non-free works, whether or not they are accessible elsewhere on the Internet. J Milburn (talk) 20:41, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

CC of post at Pepso2

Hi, J. I've posted a comment on Pepso2's page that I think encapsulates our discussion. I'm placing it here as well to make sure I understood correctly and that we're on the same page, which I think we are. Please let me know what you think.

Hi, Pepso. I think in speaking with J Milburn and each of us providing background about the nature of Sunday comic-strip story/art and of non-free content criteria that we reached a common ground that will help the comprehensiveness of comic-strip articles without violating Wikipedia policy.

Essentially, it's this: While you or I or comic-strip scholars like Maurice Horn, editor of the standard reference The World Encyclopedia of Comics, understand that truncating a Sunday page is like showing just the top half of a painting, this may not be widely understood outside this specialized realm. What J Milburn rightly suggests is that with any use of a full Sunday-page comic strip, the use of a complete strip must be justified by commentary (quoted from a reliable-source scholar such as Horn, of course) that describes the interplay of word and art, describes the manner in which the cartoonist creates a beginning, middle and end through that interplay, and how the page works as a single, complete entity in a way that truncating it creates a false impression of the creator and his/her work. Additionally I think, and this is just me, that having the page sized to be readable on the image page means it doesn't need to be large enough to be readable on the article page.

I'll post this at J Milburn's page to get his comments.

With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 18:00, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I've tried to parallel images and body copy. Note Fanny Cory. Finding quotes that go into a detailed analysis of narrative art will not be easy. But will forge ahead for the greater good. Pepso2 (talk) 10:54, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Re Apartment 3-G: Artomine selected two panels that show the illustrator's art style and the three central characters (a strong focus of the body copy). The other image shows important elements not featured in the Artomine choice, including logo, narrative construction, page layout and design, use of bold lettering effect and the type of comic strip format. Pepso2 (talk) 12:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

3-G image has been reduced and info added to rationale. Pepso2 (talk) 12:47, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

It breaks down like this: The article covers the 3-G strip and the characters. One image shows the strip minus central characters. The other image shows the three central characters. Artomine's images come from his personal art collection. As I noted earlier, it is difficult to find these old strips and cartoonist photos. Much time is spent just searching. And the cartoonist photos are just as important as the Sunday strips in constructing an encyclopedic record of comic strip syndication in the 20th century. As I research this, I am continually surprised by what I did not know (such as the work of Fanny Cory). This indicates to me the necessity of fully detailed documentation of early strips for the benefit of future generations. Pepso2 (talk) 13:51, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, again. Just trying to provide a third voice and hopefully add a perspective to the discussion. I've read the comments here by Pepso2 and by J Milburn at Pepso's talk page. I think Pepso is making a good-faith effort that, from some of the comments I've read, might not be fully recognized as such. I don't think he has ulterior motives, and I think he is genuinely making an effot to do right by J and by content criteria.

There's also an overall view that might have gotten lost in the details, and as I'm as guilty of that as anyone: Comic strips are primarily a visual storytelling medium, and it's not possible to have any sort of real understanding of a given strip without pertinent, relevant examples of a strip's visuals and its storytelling. The two panels that depict the lead characters seem necessary, of course. Those panels, however, while nicely chosen (the dialog about student protestors and the casual sexism there plant the series in its era far more organically and succinctly than any description could) give very little indication of the creators' storytelling style. How the creators use establishing shots, closeups, cuts within character dialog and buildup to the final panel are all intrinsic to the subject. Can a comic strip article absolutely do without such an example? It's a tradeoff: You can get basic understanding of a comic strip without such an example, but not a full, comprehensive understanding. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Pepso, you need to drop the "preserved for future generations" crap. That's not what Wikipedia is for. If you want to create some kind of vault site, archiving past newspaper comics, that's fine, go for it, but Wikipedia is not it. How you have managed to find a full strip like that which does not illustrate the three main characters is beyond me. Tenebrae, I do not doubt that Pepso intends to improve the encyclopedia, he just has a rather warped view of what the encyclopedia is, and does not seem to comprehend that our NFCC have to be followed. Again, we need to ask in each instance what we need non-free content to show- does this really need to be shown? Can this be shown by free content, probably text? If the answers to these questions are "yes" and "no" respectively, then we must carefully choose non-free content to illustrate the fact, showing only as much as is absolutely necessary. There can be no attitude of "this is a comics article, therefore I can use x amount of non-free content". I appreciate that this is a visual medium, but that does not mean we throw the NFCC out of the window. I've written articles on films and modern musicians without using non-free pictures, videos or sounds. J Milburn (talk) 15:25, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Was it Zappa who said, "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture?" When I began on Wikipedia six years ago, I was surprised to find old radio shows and classic comic strips (apart from the top three or four) got so little coverage. I researched old radio and when I got bored with that I moved on to comic strips. That eventually prompted me to focus on the cartoonists rather than the strips. The first encyclopedia I encountered as a child was The Book of Knowledge and therein I learned about anamorphic art. Similarly, I would think that somewhere there are high-school students who are eager to learn about long ago cancelled radio programs and comic strips. Many youngsters have no concept of radio drama and continuity comic strips, no knowledge that both started with The Gumps. Even I never knew this until about ten years ago. Pepso2 (talk) 15:48, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure there are a lot of people who are interested in reading about this material, or could become so if they came in contact with good articles about it. Again, though, this does not mean that we can ignore our policies. We're here to write about the artform, not to archive examples of it. J Milburn (talk) 20:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

FP?

Hey J, thanks to Visionholder's efforts we now have two gorgeous images of Drymoreomys. Do you think the image shown here would stand a chance at FPC? Or perhaps the other one, File:Drymoreomys albimaculatus 001.jpg, in which the rat is partially hidden by a branch, would be better? Thanks, Ucucha (talk) 21:25, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I replied on my talk page. Ucucha (talk) 21:40, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

How is the addition I made "not nuetral"?

I did not describe the videos, just noted that this is what she has been doing. Even my edit summary was nuetral in tone. I am open to compromise.1archie99 (talk) 21:52, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Patof.jpg

Hi,

Can you help me about this picture. I'm the webmaster of the "Bienvenue à Patofville" Blog and it's authorized by the owners of the rights on the "Patof" character. The photo is a portion of an LP. Is there a way to make use it on Wikipedia? Or maybe to use another photo that is not an LP cover? --Bespin74 (talk) 13:18, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. indeed it's not true! I took a sample from another image because I don't understand all the templates, sorry! We don't have information about the photograph of the LP, it's an album from 1972... Can you tell me how to correct it? --Bespin74 (talk) 13:49, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Jacques Desrosiers who portrayed Patof died in 1996. The right to use the name and photographs of Patof on my blog, Twitter and Facebook has been granted to me by a representant of the family, who's in his seventies. As a consultant, I just finished working on a DVD project with Patof, that will came out soon in Canada. Thanks for helping me! --Bespin74 (talk) 13:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

The album is "Patof en Russie" (1972). The name of the Copyright holder is Pierre Bourque. Thanks. --Bespin74 (talk) 14:58, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, what's the size of the new image I should upload? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bespin74 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Again, thank you very much. That's not simple to upload images to Wikipedia!!! --Bespin74 (talk) 15:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Katy Perry discography/archive1

Im not sure if you are watching this page so ill message you. All comments i believe have been addressed and changed, if not i have responded to your points. Thanks for the review (: - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 18:34, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

FLC of K-Ci & JoJo discography

Hello J Milburn,

I appreciate your comments you have done have just finished replying to them. I believe I have addressed all of your concerns..
—Michael Jester (talk) 01:12, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I know you're a busy person, but whenever you get a chance, I believe I have addressed your wikilinking concern.
—Michael Jester (talk) 03:05, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Enzifer

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Urgehal Metal Mean Festival 20 08 2011 10.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 10:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Mr Milburn,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Dustbin Baby- April in the graveyard.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 25, 2011. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2011-09-25. howcheng {chat} 16:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/FutureSex/LoveSounds/archive2

Hi J. Does music interest you? I was wondering if you could drop by the PR page. Regards, Efe (talk) 10:54, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Beat of My Drum

Hi, so I have added the Credits and personnel section adapted from the album booklet (that came today!) so I think all of the issues have been addressed? --FeuDeJoie (talk) 21:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2011

• Opinion essay: The global mission, the image filter and the "German question"

• Recent research: Top female Wikipedians, reverted newbies, link spam, social influence on admin votes, Wikipedians' weekends, WikiSym previews

• News and notes: WMF strikes down enwiki consensus, academic journal partnerships, and eyebrows raised over minors editing porn-related content

• In the news: Sockpuppeting journalist recants, search dominance threatened, new novels replete with Wikipedia references

• WikiProject report: A project in overdrive: WikiProject Automobiles

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: "Broadly construed" explained, voting begins on Senkaku Islands case, invitation to comment on CU/OS candidates

• Technology report: 1.18 deployment on track, "mythical" Git migration scheduled, editor decline statistics improved

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:34, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Greetings

Because I hate turning FAC into a PR, can you review Nintendo DSi? Regards, « ₣M₣ » 22:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

FPC

Think File:James Earl Jones 2010.jpg would do well at FPC? – Connormah (talk) 04:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Faryl Smith non-review at PR

I am sorry that this article did not receive a review, after a patient wait since 19 September. It looks an interesting subject and I would have liked to review it. Unfortunately, PR is so short of reviewers that the backlog (article waiting for review for 4+ days) has been stuck at well over 30 for a week or more, with some waiting for nearly 4 weeks. This will, unfortunately, remain a problem until we can persuade a few more editors to contribute to PR on a regular basis. Good luck at FAC (I'll try to take a look there). Brianboulton (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I also wanted to apologize - appreciate all your reviews with images and wanted to help out your article. Will also try to take a look at the FAC. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:38, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Xeromphalina setulipes. LittleMountain5 22:19, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Great work! LittleMountain5 22:19, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

• News and notes: Italian Wikipedia shuts down over new privacy law; Wikimedia Sverige produce short Wikipedia films, Sue Gardner calls for empathy

• In the news: QRpedia launches to acclaim, Jimbo talks social media, Wikipedia attracts fungi, terriers and Greeks bearing gifts

• WikiProject report: Kia ora WikiProject New Zealand

• Featured content: Reviewers praise new featured topic: National treasures of Japan

• Arbitration report: Last call for comments on CheckUser and Oversight teams

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:18, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Featured Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	I hope I don't sound like a broken record, but... wow! Great job adding Xeromphalina setulipes to your ever-growing list of Featured Articles! Please accept this barnstar. Your work is, as always, much appreciated (and so are your comments on nominations from others). – Quadell (talk) 13:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hola,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Keep Calm and Carry On Poster.svg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 7, 2011. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2011-10-07. howcheng {chat} 16:26, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for being bold. IMO a sensible thing to do. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Delist

Thought I'd point you too: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Keep Calm and Carry On Poster.svg — raekyt 07:28, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

FA review of images in Shapley-Folkman lemma, please?

Hi J.!

Editor Ucucha asked that somebody review the images for the FA candidate Shapley-Folkman lemma. Because of your image review for the last promoted FA article, I thought I'd ask you.

Thanks again for your contributions to the project!

Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 18:42, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Back again..

Could you help remove all the watermarks and other unseemly crap atop the photo in Wikimedia Commons used for the article here on the en.Wikipedia for The Moody Blues please? It's the first photo, located in the infobox. I've found a photographer with some excellent up to date photos of the remaining members, but the one already there is already great by the intro (despite defacing it with all that, ah-- war paint). --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:17, 8 October 2011 (UTC)