Jump to content

User talk:Rama/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6→Archive 10

Comment marche la lutte contre le copyvio ici?

Salut Rama, j'aimerais bien savoir comment marche la lutte contre le copyvio sure en: après avoir eu la surprise de me faire réverter par un admin après avoir signalé un copyvio via le modèle {{db-g12}}. Je trouve qu'il y a deux problèmes, l'apposition d'un modèle n'est généralement pas suffisante pour décrire en quoi consiste le copyvio, cependant il ne semble pas que les admins aient pour habitude de lire la page de discussion correspondante. En fait il me semble que cette lemplate sert surtout pour passer en SI les copyvios bruts de décoffrage détectés en RC mais n'est pas adaptée aux copyvios plus profonds dans l'historique. Dans le cas présent, au moment où j'avais détecté le copyvio, tout l'article était de fait à passer en SI puisque toutes les versions étaient copyvios (puis est venu un autre éditeur peu au fait des règles de copyvio qui a jugé bon de supprimer le bandeau et de transformer l'article en ébauche mais c'est une autre histoire). Cependant, il m'est arrivé dans un autre cas d'avoir à faire avec un article ou seulement certaines versions étaient contaminées, j'ai utilisé ce même bandeau, n'en trouvant pas d'autre adapté et un admin a supprimé la chose. J'ai eu toutes les [peines du monde] à obtenir qu'il restaure des versions non contaminées. Donc est ce qu'il n'existerait pas un bandeau permettant d'expliquer clairement en quoi consiste le copyvio et en précisant ce qu'on attend des admins de manières à ce qu'ils ne fassent pas n'importe quoi, passage de buldozer ou revert. Voilà, j'espère ne pas trop t'importuner avec mes déboires :) mais j'avoue que le coup de l'admin qui reverte une détection de copyvio je l'ai mauvaise...--Kimdime (talk) 11:10, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Peut-être que l'admin en question a fait une erreur, ça peut arriver. C'est difficile à juger parce que l'article en question a depuis été réduit à sa portion sûre, et les version antérieures effacées. Il semble donc que tu aies bien eu raison en fin de compte. Bonne continuation! Rama (talk) 12:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Oui, je suis désolé de t'avoir embété avec cette histoire qui est en train de se résoudre. Ceci dit, il me semble que la gestion des copyvios n'est pas au top ici mais bon je ne vais pas me prendre la tête plus que ça. Voila, bonne continuation!--Kimdime (talk) 12:19, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Il y a effectivement de temps à autre des gens qui font n'importe quoi (ce qui peut arriver), et même certain qui militent activement pour qu'on fasse n'importe quoi. Je suppose que c'est l'inconvénient de la taille du projet. Rama (talk) 12:21, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike#The video file is biased

Hi there Rama. I was wondering if you could take a look at Talk:July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike#The video file is biased? I have no idea how one would go about converting a 600MB .mp4 file to several .ogv ones. If you could possibly do that, I would be very appreciative. NW (Talk) 03:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Not that I hold you responsible for it, but I do not appreciate the tone of the conversation that you link. You can achieve the desired effect with commands like
ffmpeg2theora -s 166 -e 330 -o CollateralMurder-1.ogv  CollateralMurder.mp4 
...
ffmpeg2theora -s 810 -e 976 -o CollateralMurder-5.ogv  CollateralMurder.mp4
Rama (talk) 09:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of International response to Hurricane Katrina

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is International response to Hurricane Katrina. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International response to Hurricane Katrina (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:International Brigades poster2.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:International Brigades poster2.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:MobileProductionFacilities.png

Thank you for uploading File:MobileProductionFacilities.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:38, 1 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:38, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:DestroyerIkazuchi.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:DestroyerIkazuchi.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Contaflex TLR

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Contaflex TLR, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Contaflex_(TLR). For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 08:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Contaflex TLR

Hi Rama. I have tagged Contaflex TLR as a copyvio because the GFDL license is no longer allowed on Wikipedia after the switch to dual licensing in 2009 (see WP:Licensing update). Please rewrite the text in your own words. Thanks, Theleftorium (talk) 18:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I've tagged Kodak Ektra and Ermanox for the same reason. Theleftorium (talk) 18:56, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Titan's Cross

Bonjour, Rama. Now that I have used up all of the French words I know that relate to this discussion, I'd like to say that I have nominated for the Titain's Cross in Bronze, which you can see here. The award is given out to people which have been identified as major contributors to Operation Majestic Titan. Expect the award soon. Buggie111 (talk) 18:04, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

What about Forbin into Destroyers article

Is your objection to the addition of Forbin to the Destroyers article still exists? If you do let me know. I plan to add Forbin to the destroyers article. The French ship is missing from that article.Bcs09 (talk) 17:04, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Bah. The French call them "frigates", they have the NATO "D" markings for "Destroyer", and they are cruisers for all intents and purposes, so... Add away. Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm nominating "Trafalgar-Auguste Mayer.jpg" for Feature Picture status!

I think the image is great, meets all qualifications (as such a high-ranking admin I guess you'd know) and is truly amongst some of Wikipedia's greatest.

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Auguste Mayer's "Battle of Trafalgar"--I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 01:42, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Administrative assistance needed

Hi Rama, you have tried by failed to implement your actually very good proposal about certain images on Commons. Here's the chance to implement it on Wikipedia while fully complying with Wikipedia policies.

Let's first talk about the applied policies please (it is concerning user pages)

  • According to WP:UPNO "Wikipedia is not a soapbox" is usually interpreted as applying to user space "
According to WP:NOTSOAPBOX "... Therefore, content hosted in Wikipedia is not for:
1... propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, religious, or otherwise....
2.Opinion pieces. Although some topics, particularly those concerning current affairs and politics, may stir passions and tempt people to "climb soapboxes" (i.e. passionately advocate their pet point of view), Wikipedia is not the medium for this. Articles must be balanced to put entries, especially for current events, in a reasonable perspective, and represent a neutral point of view. "
  • According to WP:UPNO "Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal website. Your user page is about you as a Wikipedian, and pages in your user space should be used as part of your efforts to contribute to the project."
  • According to WP:UPNO "Extremely offensive material may be removed on sight by any editor."
  • According to WP:UP#POLEMIC "polemical statements unrelated to Wikipedia, or statements attacking or vilifying groups of editors or persons" are not allowed on user pages.

So, in accordance to all of the above could you please remove Image:Nonazis2.gif together with the text below it from that?

You probably wonder, if there were precedents of such removals. Yes, there were. Here's one.

Also please take a look at the user talk page. The user, who called another editor "nazi", claimed censorship, and so on found full support of the user:RolandR, and even was awarded by him. This fact alone speaks the volumes about user:RolandR.

In the situation with that particular cartoon, the text below it is an offensive as the cartoon itself, and by request I could provide full explanations why it is. It is up to you, Rama, to show that you meant business back at commons


Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Rama
Please note that, as a result of an offensive comment left by this editor on my talk page, this image has previously been the subject of a similar request, in which the admin involved declined to take action on the grounds that that it was "not sufficiently divisive to warrant arbitral sanctions". In the course of the discussion, the admin also found that this editor's participation was a breach of her topic ban, and she was consequently blocked for 48 hours[1]. This editor, who has commented that "even seeing your signature at my talk page makes me sick", did not see fit to inform me that she had made this frivolous complaint. She is has been banned from interaction with several other editors (including from requesting admin action against them), is conducting a vendetta against me, and does not have clean hands in this matter. This request is made in bad faith, and I request that you reject it entirely, and that you instruct the editor to cease from such behaviour, which is certainly a breach of the spirit, and probably of the letter, of her topic ban. RolandR (talk) 17:45, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Mbz1 response to the acusations by roland above and below
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Well, as usually rolandr has chosen to discuss me rather that the request and the applied policies. He left me no other choice, but to explain my bans.Yes, I have an interaction ban with two (not several as it is falsely claimed by user:RolandR ) users. In both situations, it was rather a restriction order that helped me to get rid of harassment and wikihounding including but not limited filing stupid SPI against me, posting 20+ "warnings" to my talk page in 15 minutes and so on. Please notice that it is a lie that I cannot request administrative assistance against the users I have interaction banned with. I could and I did few times. It resulted in the user being blocked in 4 times out of 5, but I am not sure how this matters. Here is what my interaction ban states: "If any of the parties feel that the other party has violated this ban or other Wikipedia policy, and no uninvolved administrator responds to the violation within a reasonable amount of time, they may notify 1 uninvolved administrator of the incident on that administrators' talk page 12 hours after the original perceived infraction, and if that first administrator does not respond by at least acknowledging seeing the report within 24 hrs they may notify a second uninvolved administrator in the same manner". I have no interaction ban with rolandr. I have never breached and never been blocked for the violation of my interaction ban as rolandr falsely tries to present below. I only was blocked for the violation of my topic ban. Please notice I am ready to bear a full responsibility for my own behavior, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my request. My request is a legitimate request that is in full compliance with few wikipedia policies, and I'll repeat one more time: now it is up to you, Rama, to show that you meant business back at commons. --Mbz1 (talk) 18:20, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
"This editing restriction shall include a complete prohibition from comments on the respective user talk pages, filing reports on admin noticeboards, reverting edits on articles, commenting in other venues about the other party, or directly responding to each other's comments on article talk pages"[2]. It is also a breach of several Wikipewdia policies to call another editor a liar. And in respect of her comnment that she regularly breached this restriction in order to report other editors, this led on several occasions to a block of the editor herself, including in the instance she cites above. This is an inveterate edit-warrior, who is hounding other editors who do not share her political outlook; her complaint is worthless and vexatious.RolandR (talk) 19:16, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Attachment theory

Would you mind explaining why you have deleted a picture of an infant exploring a book with one of a small child exploring a book? Fainites barleyscribs 22:35, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I did not delete the image in question. The deletion request can be seen here. Rama (talk) 22:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh dear what a shame. Thanks for finding a substitute.Fainites barleyscribs 22:45, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

P226 pic

Have you considered adding in labels for the controls? Also, I love the new P210 pic. :D Faceless Enemy (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Good idea, here you go File:SIG P226 IMG 3053-labels.jpg. Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay, awesome, added in the labeling junk. I'm not sure what to call number 1 though, since it's where the lockup happens as well as the ejection port. Any ideas? Thanks for the help so far! Faceless Enemy (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I though of 1 as being the ejector, but I can change the place of the label an add new ones if I've missed something. Cheers! Rama (talk) 22:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
It's the ejection port; the ejector is inside the gun itself. It's also where the slide and barrel lock up. Edit: Unless I'm mistaken, it's actually part of the slide release lever... Faceless Enemy (talk) 00:53, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of L'Eplattenier helmet

The article L'Eplattenier helmet has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ikar.us (talk) 01:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Triumph pic

That's an interesting one. It doesn't look like the T110 engine - it has that circular cover on the side of the engine immediately underneath the cooling vanes. It looks like a Bonneville engine which is what makes me think it is actually a Tiger T90. I'm not enough of an expert on those early Triumphs to be 100% certain though. Do some googling on T90 images and you'll see what I mean e.g. http://classic-motorbikes.net/images/gallery/10691.jpg

Excellent, thank you very much! Rama (talk) 06:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:HMS Leeds Castle.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:HMS Leeds Castle.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sakkura (talk) 02:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kkoktu

Hello! Your submission of Kkoktu at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Thelmadatter (talk) 15:24, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

French Martel-class battleships

Hi there; may I take you back past some two years of history. The French battleship Charles Martel is one of some 46 stub-class aricles which we are trying to improve. On the article talk page you appear quite clear that the ship laid down in 1882 is the same one as the one that was launched in 1893. All of my sources - Jane, Conway, Gibbons - all are quite certain that the early ship was cancelled, together with "Brennus", and the ship which existed was authorised and laid down in 1891. I concede that none of my sources are French. If you feel that your source is reliable, could I ask you to name it? Thank you. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 19:54, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Jean-Michel Roche, Dictionnaire de la flotte française de 1671 à nos jours. Rama (talk) 23:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Hipposandal

Hello! Your submission of Hipposandal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Allen3 talk 00:28, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Océan class Ironclads

Category:Océan class Ironclads, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Sandstein  16:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Hipposandal

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Holocaust images

Rama, I've always tried to assume good faith of you in your comments about Holocaust images, but your post today that fair-use policies are like Arbeit macht frei, and that some people loathe working [3] (whatever it was supposed to mean), was so inappropriate I don't know what to say. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 12:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I am not interested. Rama (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. PhilKnight (talk) 16:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I enjoyed the triangular association you made (no irony here). "work-free-whatsthewordwithanHthatmakesyoucry". You stroking everything says a lot. :-) -DePiep (talk) 20:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, you should be blocked and desysoped for an anti-Semitic comment you made. You are a disgrace to Wikipedia, rama. Of course I should have known about all of that earlier.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Don't worry, Rama. Clearly, they're sending in the lower echelon, the not-so-smart tugs to disturb with whatever at hand (the anti-word does it always). That means first layer could not fix it! Later on, there will be the indirect threats and so. Very predictable. -DePiep (talk) 02:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, that's right, nothing to worry about, rama. Here's on wikipedia, and on wikimedia commons for that matter, one could make an anti-Semitic comment, compare Israelis to nazis and get away with it, on the other hand, if one calls an anti-Semtic cartoon "an anti-Semitic cartoon", or anti-Semitic cartoonist "an anti-Semitic cartoonist", or an anti-Semitic comment "an anti-Semitic comment" one could easily get blocked for this. Oh well...--Mbz1 (talk) 02:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I am not interested. I invited question, not insults that border on libel. Rama (talk) 05:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Wolf (disambiguation)

Because there are so many things called "Wolf River", "Wolf this" or "Wolf that", we recently went through and culled all those that aren't, at least according to their articles, commonly known simply as "(the) Wolf(ves)". Is there any reason to believe that a user looking for the Brigade would simply type in "w-o-l-f" and therefore arrive at the disambiguation page to find its link there useful? On those grounds hundreds of other articles were removed and it's much more usable now, but if we allow the brigade then why not all the rest, and we'll have another mess. Chrisrus (talk) 03:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Policy on Classification by Ethnicity, Gender, Religion and Sexuality

Hi, I have a problem with the article White Argentine. In the article I mentioned many people who are Argentine by birth and by option (they immigrated when they were children and stayed in Argetnina until their death, or they are now living there). All those people mentioned in the article are perfectly Caucasian by phenotype, and all have European/Middle Eastern ancestry. To see the names, check this older version of the article, for they are now removed. This is because some users appeared criticizing the article and alleging that mentioning all those persons without a source that explicitly define them as "White Argentine/Argentinian" was a breach to Wikipedia's BLP policy. Is that true? Because I read the article of WP policy on categorization by ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality, and the topic "Race" is still under dispute. Besides, one of the users that criticizes the article is also involved in the proposal/discussion/RfC of the policy itself. If the matter isn't still resolved, can they apply a rule that it is not fully valid yet? If I provide sources that every living Argentine mentioned in the article is of predominantly European ancestry, isn't that enough to define him/her as White? Please, help me clarify this doubt.--Pablozeta (talk) 12:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:SFOR-badge.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:SFOR-badge.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 08:14, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Battleship Yamato sinking.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude (talk) 19:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Request for File:France map Lambert-93 with regions and departments-occupation.svg

Hi Rama! Thanks for creating this map. Could you make some further amendments to it? Namely:

  • Adding the official title ("Closed Zone") to the Zone of German settlement area in northeast France? I'd suggest

Closed Zone

intended for German settlement

return of refugees prohibited

There should be enough space diagonally, I think.

  • Denoting the border between this zone and the rest of occupied France, like the Demarcation Line? It was called the "North-East Line".

Regards, --Morgan Hauser (talk) 07:51, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for your remarks. I'll implement them at my earliest convenience. Would you happen to know the original terms in German, for the German map? Thank you and cheers! Rama (talk) 19:33, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I also believe the Germans referred to them as the "Sperrzone" and the "Nordostlinie".--Morgan Hauser (talk) 10:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

At long last, it has been done. Rama (talk) 22:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Could you change the phrasing somewhat from "Zone of German settlement" to "intended for German settlement"? From what I can gather there were never any Germans actually settled in those parts of France during the war.--Morgan Hauser (talk) 08:17, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
I'll add this to my todo list. It should be done in the first part of next week. Rama (talk) 22:04, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

FPC

FYI: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Paul Simonon. Nice picture. Jujutacular talk 13:49, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Paul Simonon
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Paul Simonon mg 6692 crop.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Makeemlighter (talk) 15:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:International Brigades poster1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:International Brigades poster1.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:14, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:International Brigades poster3.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:International Brigades poster3.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of French ship Meuse (A607)

The article French ship Meuse (A607) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A redlink is more likely to be transformed in an article, this redirect is not really helpful. Grand-Duc (talk) 20:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Grand-Duc (talk) 20:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

French ship Meuse (A607) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect French ship Meuse (A607). Since you had some involvement with the French ship Meuse (A607) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

57mm/60 modèle 1951 gun

Hello -- noticed you are the sole editor of this article. I would like to expand the article a bit to discuss both the naval and ground-based (AA) roles of the Bofors 57mm/60 and to mention some of the other nations that used this system. The text you have already placed into the article would be of course preserved. If these changes are to be made, I also propose moving the title of the article to not include modèle 1951 as the article would address more than one variant of the weapon. Thoughts? Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 18:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I have no objection. You obviously are the expert there. Cheers! Rama (talk) 17:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Rama! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Affiche rouge.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Affiche rouge.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. noclador (talk) 12:46, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Barnstar-heml.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Barnstar-heml.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:49, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Rama,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.


Sincerely,


Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 03:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Greeting, and thank you for your interest,
I am not certain that I would be a great help, but I'll put my name on the list and leave it for you to decide whether you wish to include me in your sample.
Cheers!
Rama (talk) 23:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Classe Alsace

La Classe Alsace et une question de copyright Bonjour J'ai beaucoup apprécié votre votre dessin du type n°3 de la class Alsace avec des tourelles quadruples, même si on peut penser que finalement le choix s'est porté sur le type n°1 avec trois tourelle triples de 380 mm, comme l'indique l'ouvrage de Jordan et Dumas "French battleships 1922-1956" Mais mon propos aujourd'hui porte sur un site allemand 3dhistory.de qui fait état de plans des cuirassés français "Clemenceau" et "Gascogne", en affirmant qu'ils ont été mis dans le domaine public. On les trouve en faisan French battleship Clemenceau sur Google. Je fais appel à votre compétence pour savoir si ces documents sont bien dans le domaine public, et si oui, comment on pourrait les intégrer dans des articles Wikipedia.Mreci de ce que vous pourrez me dire.Paul-Pierre Valli (talk) 10:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour, et merci pour votre intérêt !
Effectivement, même si j'aurais trouvé amusante la progression de 2 à 3 tourelles quadruples, un navire avec 12 canons de 380 est assez improbable. Les Britanniques ne sont pas passés loin avec la classe King George V, mais sans y arriver complètement.
En ce qui concerne la licence des plans, je crains qu'ils ne soient pas à proprement parler dans le domaine public. La mise dans le domaine public est plutôt une pratique américaine, l'administration française tend à publier gratuitement mais en réservant des droits [4]. Le Service historique de la Défense a effectivement publié de nombreux plans, y compris ceux du Clemenceau de 1940 [5].
Je pense que le mieux serait d'intégrer ces plans dans la documentation dont nous disposons déjà pour réaliser nos propres plans sous licence libre. Dommage que ces archices du SHD ne soient pas franchement dans le domaine public, ce sont des documents passionnants qui mériteraient d'être mieux connus et gagneraient à être proposés sur Wikipédia et Wikimedia Commons.
Merci encore et bonne continuation ! Rama (talk) 23:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:MOS KIM-1 IMG 4211.jpg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:MOS KIM-1 IMG 4211 cropped scale.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (talk) 00:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Help with battles of 1794-1795

Hi Rama, I've been on hiatus from Wikipedia for the last 18 months, hence the lack of communication - hope you've been well in the meanwhile. I'm currently working on a series of articles on actions off Brest in 1794-1795 and the British sources I have access to are vague on the French casualties and captains involved. The actions in question are the Capture of Alexander, Cornwallis's Retreat and the Battle of Groix - do you have access to a source that gives the French casualties in these actions and confirms the list of captains currently given in the article First Battle of Groix? Any help would be much appreciated.--Jackyd101 (talk) 22:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, delighted to hear from you again. I hope you are well. I don't have access to my documentation durig the week this month, but I will on saturdays and sundays, so I'll see what I can do for you in five days. Cheers! Rama (talk) 22:15, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Excellent! Much appreciated. British sources during the yeatrs 1793-1796 are so poor with regards to French ships that its hard to trust anything they say. --Jackyd101 (talk) 11:18, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Hey Rama, I'm leaving a notice on Battle of Groix that I'll be revamping that article over the next week or so, and transferring the orders of battle into a new list article Order of Battle in the Biscay campaign of June 1795 in order to save space. This list will also cover the OOBs for Cornwallis's Retreat and the British naval OOB for the Invasion of France (1795), which were all part of the same campaign (see User:jackyd101/Workbox7). Rest assured that the work you've done on the article in the last few days will all be incorporated into the new articles. Thanks--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the heads up. It is always a pleasure to work with you, even though I'm a cutter to your 120-gun.
I haven't quite managed to find precise figures for casualties at Groix, but Troude (Batailles navales de la France, O. Troude, Challamel ainé, 1867, vol.2, p.419) qualifies them of "insignificant on both sides" ("Les pertes étaient insignifiantes des deux côtés"). As to the names of the ship captains, we appear to have some discrepancies between your list and Troude's (see p. 410 and 413), I don't know what to make of that. Troude is a bit of a 19th-century reference, of course, but he's cited by reputable contemporary books. An interesting detail is that he usually gives only vague qualifiers for losses, rather than precise figures; I wonder whether this constrast between French and British sources mimicking the difference in sanitary conditions between the two navies is random, or whether it reflects a different set of mind.
I'll try and see if I can find more. Good continuation and cheers! Rama (talk) 19:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

French battleship Dunkerque

Bonjour Rama L'article French battleship Dunkerque dans le Wiki anglais est en passe d'être classé Good Article, après avoir été sérieusement remanié quant à la forme par User:Parsecboy. Il se trouve que j'y ai apporté précedemment pas d'éléments de fait, d'ordre technique. En le relisant, un point me chiffonne, au sujet du sabordage de Toulon, cette phrase :«Her captain, capitaine de vaisseau Amiel, refused to scuttle his ship without a written order, but was finally convinced by the captain of the nearby La Galissonnière.» Il semble que ce soit vous qui l'avez ajouté... en septembre 2006. Or je n'ai pas retrouvé trace de ce point dans la littérature dont je dispose, la citation que fait Parsecboy (p.74 du livre de R.Dumas dans «Les cuirassés Dunkerque et Strasbourg» ne porte que sur le sabordage et non sur l'attitude du Capitaine de Vaisseau Amiel, et dans le livre de J. Jordan et R. Dumas «French battleships 1922-1956», il y a un plan de Toulon, lors du sabordage, p. 91, qui situe La Galissonnière dans la darse Missiessy et le Dunkerque dans un des grands bassins Vauban, ce qui rend assez improbable un contact entre les deux commandants. Bref, si c'est vous qui avez ajouté cette information (mais je peux me tromper, car la consultation de l'historique d'un article, à cinq ans de distance n'est pas chose aisée), vous en avez sûrement la source. Merci de vos lumières.Paul-Pierre Valli (talk) 16:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour, et merci pour votre intérêt et votre excellent travail. Je suis ravi qu'il y ait d'autres francophones qui s'occupent de la marine française sur la Wikipédia anglophone.
Pour répondre à votre question, je crois que l'information vient d'ici [6]. Cela dit, cette mention dans l'article sur le Dunkerque vient de l'article Scuttling of the French fleet in Toulon, que j'avais un peu enrichi sans méthode en recoupant des sources diverses sur Internet (on s'imagine corriger un petit point, on se pose une question, et lorsque l'on regarde sa monter, l'après-midi a filé et l'article a gagné plusieurs pages, vous savez ce que c'est). Information à prendre avec de la distance, donc; ce site [7] m'a l'air sérieux et ne donne pas du tout l'impression qu'Amiel ait hésité, bien au contraire. En tout état de cause, il y a des sources plus sérieuses que des sites Internet.
Merci pour votre vigilance et pour votre travail, et bonne continuation ! Rama (talk) 17:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

MSU Research Questions

Hello, I am involved with a research project for Michigan State University and am wondering if you would be able to answer a few questions regarding tool sets on Wikipedia. What were the tools you mainly used prior to becoming an admin, and after becoming an admin? Here is a link to the project if you are interested Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Wiki-Project Management (Jonathan Obar) , and if you have any questions please let me know. Thanks! Ltezl (talk) 22:27, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't mind having a look at the questions, where are they? It's been a while since my RfA, and I'm not quite sure what you mean by tools, so I'm unsure to what extend I'll be of help, but I'd be glad if I could. Cheers! Rama (talk) 23:46, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Basically what features of wiki did you use before becoming an admin? Mainly just editing? Were the other features besides editing? And once you became an admin, things like blocking, reporting etc. Basically trying to get a feel for how an admin uses wiki and features they utilize. Ltezl (talk) 14:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited French frigate Sibylle (1801), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sybil (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

French naval vessels

This is just a quick thankyou for all your work on French naval vessels. I notice that your articles on en:wiki are more detailed at times than the articles on fr:wiki. Great stuff - bonne continuation ! Buckshot06 (talk) 02:26, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the encouragements, this will lift my spirits to do some more. Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

HMS Diomede (1781)

Hi Rama, Are you preparing an article on the "Action of 22 October 1794"? Just checking. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 14:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

He's already created it Action of 22 October 1794 - and very nice it is too! If there is no objection, I'd be keen to add British sources to this, would that be OK Rama?--Jackyd101 (talk) 15:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I would be grateful. I've got contradictory sources about the ships present, for instance, so I would be happy if you have other perspectives on the events. Cheers! Rama (talk) 16:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
PS: And thanks to Acad Ronin for translating my English into actual English. Rama (talk) 16:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

General Louis Francois Jeannet

Hello Rama, it seems you know a great deal about the Napoleonic era and i was wondering if you knew of any sources (primary or secondary) regarding a General Louis Francois Jeannet-Oudin and his activities in the Caribbean around 1800. I know his brother was part of a triumvirate administration of Guadeloupe around the same time and that he later served in Europe, but i have barely been able to discover anything about him during his his stay in the Caribbean. I've been doing some research on the French perspective of the quasi-war and while i can find plenty of information regarding events in Haiti and Guiana during the time, the rest of the French colonies are quite poorly covered in American sources. Any suggestions would be extremely appreciated.XavierGreen (talk) 01:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll draft a few notes in Louis-François Jeannet. Cheers! Rama (talk) 09:55, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
PS: Jeannet-Oudin is someone else: Nicolas Georges Jeannet-Oudin, who was a politician, and a nephew of Danton. (i.e. the brother that you've identified; why they have a different name is beyond me for now) Rama (talk) 10:11, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Water Filter

You are an old-timer on WP and I am a new guy so I wanted to try and understand the photo on the article WP:Water Filter entitled "A large-scale flocculation water filter." The picture appears to be a dissolved air floatation basin and does not have anything to do with filtration. Please advise me what the photo means. Drinkingwaterdoc (talk) 20:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for your enquiry and for joining in Wikipedia!
This photograph is 5 years old, so my recollection might be a bit nebulous; it dates from a trip I took in the water purification centre near Bret lake, which I had tried to document to the best of my limited abilities. I have no competence in water purification, and it is entirely possible that I misheard at the moment, or mislabeled the photograph later.
In these matters, experience with Wikipedia means very little, and expertise with the subject means everything. I gather that you are an expert on drinking water, so you should not hesitate to replace the image on the article with a more suitable one and correct the label of the image if you deem it necessary. I would be happy to assist you if you have any difficulties, as sanitation is a fields for which I have the utmost respect.
Thank you and cheers! Rama (talk) 21:02, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The Blindman and the Lame

Many thanks for uploading your photo of the statue illustrating this fable. It is very difficult to locate such work relating to fables on WikiCommons, not just because of their comparative rarity but because of copyright restrictions on photos of 3D objects. I was therefore delighted to have the article illustrated in this way by a statue I admire. I have now moved it to the head of the article. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 23:21, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I am delighted if my contributions can prove useful. Thank you for your own writings, which are very interesting to read and document such an important corpus of works. Cheers! Rama (talk) 09:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Merge proposals

It's the standard for WP:SHIPS that when a ship changes navies it merits a new page. Sao Paulo and Foch don't have a snowball's chance of being merged, just FYI. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I'm accustomed to cases like French frigate Minerve (1794), for which we have a single article no matter what. Rama (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm with you Rama. In the Age of Sail when vessels might change hands four or five times, an article per change would result in a sequence of poorly-connected stubs with some re3dundancy. Much better to put it all in one continuous article and use re-directs if necessary for later changes of control. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 13:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

French corvette Sphinx (1829)

Hello, Rama, Template:Did you know nominations/French corvette Sphinx (1829) I nominated your new article for DYK. I wonder if you would remove the Stub template at the bottom, at least until after DYK has gone through its process? Stubs are not eligible for DYK. Maile66 (talk) 00:22, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you very much, I am flattered. I have removed the stub template. Cheers! Rama (talk) 06:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rama/Archive_4&oldid=1146358566"