User talk:Lar/Archive 8

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search


I recognize that this user page belongs to this Wikimedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.


This is an archive of threads started in User talk:Lar from about 1 January 2009 through about 1 March 2009. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at left for the list and to navigate to others.
My archived talk        [+/−]
Archive 1 — start through about 1 Nov 2006
Archive 2 — about 1 Nov 2006 through about 1 Mar 2007
Archive 3 — about 1 Mar 2007 through about 1 Aug 2007
Archive 4 — about 1 Aug 2007 through about 1 Jan 2008
Archive 5 — about 1 Jan 2008 through about 1 Sep 2008
Archive 6 — about 1 Sep 2008 through about 1 Nov 2008
Archive 7 — about 1 Nov 2008 through about 1 Jan 2009
Archive 8 — about 1 Jan 2009 through about 1 Mar 2009
Archive 9 — about 1 Mar 2009 through about 1 Jun 2009
Archive 10 — about 1 Jun 2009 through about 1 Sep 2009
Archive 11 — about 1 Sep 2009 through about 1 Jan 2010
Archive 12 — about 1 Jan 2010 through about 1 May 2010
Archive 13 — about 1 May 2010 through about 1 September 2010

Have you got time...[edit]

....to join IRC at the moment? abf /talk to me/ 15:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, no. Unless it's an emergency. But I probably missed it. Sorry! ++Lar: t/c 19:54, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, I only wanted to talk a bit about the new RfA-lines. But that can wait :) abf /talk to me/ 20:18, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have got time at the moment again? ;) abf «Cabale?! Quelle Caballe?» 19:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say once ;)[edit]

The Barnstar of Peace
For always assuming good faith with anyone and always having two eyes open to make commons a pice better :) abf /talk to me/ 21:29, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded! May I please thank you for always patiently explaining to me how I could improve my behavior pattern? Best wishes in 2009!--Mbz1 (talk) 18:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I try. ++Lar: t/c 00:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you![edit]

Hi Larry,
May I please tank you for the message? I would also like to bring your attention to one more user page, which is using the same image this one.I found Userbox guidelines on English Wikipedia. It clerly states:

"Wikipedia is not an appropriate place for propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind, commercial, political, religious, or otherwise, opinion pieces on current affairs or politics, self-promotion, or advertising."

It also states "Userboxes must not be inflammatory or divisive." I am not sure why user pages on Commons should be any different. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't thank me just yet. :)... we shall see how it all comes out. Also, Commons doesn't necessarily use every policy of en:wp as is. But that policy seems mostly common sense to me, we really should not have inflammatory user boxes. (I was on en:wp when a lot of the unpleasantness around userboxes first went down, it was no fun) OsamaK made that one, I think. Let's give OsamaK a chance to speak about what they had in mind. ++Lar: t/c 23:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is important to me how it all comes out, but much more important is that I do find people on Commons, who think as I do (well, at least sometimes), and are not afraid to express their opinion publicly (of course in much more polite and much more civil manner that I do. :) ) To me it makes a big difference, if one has a civil bravery to post his/her opinion on Wikipedia or Commons for the whole world to see. So, I said "thank you!", and it is what I meant, no matter how it all comes out.Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Usurp[edit]

Hey Lar, Where do I need to go on Commons to usurp a username (which I probably created, but can't remember the password too?) I need to take over "Balloonman".Poppaballoon (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

COM:CHU, and follow the instructions there. Giggy (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) what he said. ++Lar: t/c 02:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will make you a deal[edit]

I will trade you pretty photos of Austria for a pretty reinstatement of my bit (if you consider me in sufficiently good standing, etc. etc.). Giggy (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That would be bits I hope! Majorly talk 02:06, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you insist! Giggy (talk) 02:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)I consider you in sufficient good standing. Let me do a quick canvass of the fellow 'crats to see that there's no reason not to do this. You want both A and B back, is it? ++Lar: t/c 02:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Both. Just sent an email saying so. Giggy (talk) 02:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That would be good news :) --Herby talk thyme 08:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done with pleasure!!!! - Now go put yourself back in all the lists, eh? ++Lar: t/c 15:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there's one thing I missed, it was Commons paperwork. Giggy (talk) 02:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Careful what you wish for... EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:24, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: your sandbox[edit]

(refactored to Rjd0060's talk per User:Lar/PoohPolicy )++Lar: t/c 05:13, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My Flags[edit]

Hello Lar, I'm very confused because the user User:Rastrojo in Wikimedia Commons, he deleted all my proposal flags of Mexico without say nothing to me before, so, I wrote him here in Commons, asking him why he deleted my proposal flags, and only my proposal flags and no others proposal flags, and he said me, "Mexico hasn't official flags and I said my flags are officials", but I've never said that, you can verify that in the historial on the pages;

For example;

Clearly it said in Spanish "Bandera propuesta", or "Proposal Flag", and my flags have been there for long time, and now he deleted them, I really don't want to understanding wrong why exactly he did that. Should I upload them again?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heraldicos (talk • contribs) 09:56, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you think something was deleted in error, the best thing to do is to ask for a deletion review. Make the case that the material is within scope. Uploading something that was deleted is not a good approach. See COM:DEL for more information, the actual appeal would be placed at COM:UNDEL. (also, if you want numbered lists you can just use # instead of * on the lead instead of having to number things by hand...) Hope that helps. If not please ask again. ++Lar: t/c 13:16, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for answering my question, but how can I ask for a deletion review?--Heraldicos (talk) 14:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Follow the instructions here: COM:UNDEL#Add_a_request. If that's not clear I'll try to help you but it may be a bit later in the day. ++Lar: t/c 16:29, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much.--Heraldicos (talk) 19:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings Lar. First of all, I'm sorry, but I can't trust at all in a banned user from es.wikipedia, specially when he was banned for bad ettiquette. Well, I've deleted those flags because Mexican states haven't got any official, and this user was uploading unofficial flags and putting them in the articles about the flag on es.wikipedia. as a "Proposal flag by Christian Aboytes". Who is Christian Aboytes? Why should we admit those files? Why can't I draw a new flag and propose it? And, of course, we've got more. So what's the correct solution? In my humble opinion, if this user wants to propose flags, he's doing well having a website. Nothing more to say. Regards. Rastrojo (D•ES) 21:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can't you trust?, That's the real reason why did you delete them?......Why should you admit those files?, Why can't you draw a new flag and propose it?, EASY, on Wikipedia, there are many proposal flags from Spain, Mexico, and others countries and their autors are from these countries, Why only you did it to me??....because you can't trust??, I see you're judging me.--Heraldicos (talk) 01:36, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You[edit]

For your fast assistance

Hi Lar, I would like to express my gratitude for your participation at my recent RfA, which succeeded with an overwhelming final count of 100 % support. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and I promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. Please do feel free to get in touch if you feel you can improve me in any way; I will be glad to listen to all comments. But thats not all, Special thanks for your fast assistance when I needed you and your oversight tools. Therefor I give you this flower (I thought stars are becoming normal I give a flower :) ) Again, thanks, Abigor talk 17:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How[edit]

Hello Lar, how can I request to delete all my images uploaded?.--Heraldicos (talk) 12:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you tell me how can I request, because I couldn't create a subpage as it says.--Heraldicos (talk) 13:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You want everything deleted? Just now you were asking for everything to be restored via a review. I'm confused. Normally we don't just automatically delete things because someone wants them deleted, when you upload, you grant a license, although sometimes as a courtesy we do grant that, if the images aren't used anywhere and aren't likely to be. Why do you want everything deleted? ++Lar: t/c 16:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because I regret having uploaded them, I wish to delete all my images on commons, all they were made by me. I took photos myself, and I created all my drawings I uploaded, so, the license is free, public domain I said when I uploaded them. Can you tell me how can I request to deleted all my images, because I couldn't created a subpage as it says when someone want to deleted all files of "me" Heraldicos.--Heraldicos (talk) 18:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They are very nice photos... why do you want to delete them? Just because you are upset with how things have went is not a reason. For example, File:Monumento Universidad de Colima.png... this is a very pretty picture. Striking how the bas relief is lit up. AND, it's used. Our tool to check usage isn't working right now but I was able to determine that this image is used in es:Universidad de Colima, at least. And it looks good there. Patricia has given you some good advice. Please consider just taking a little time away and seeing if you feel better about things. Because it would be a shame to lose your pictures. ++Lar: t/c 19:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I know, they are nice photos, I took them myself with my camera, all they are from where I live, and all my photos are used because I put them on artitles as you can see with the University of Colima and its monuments, places, but I put them there, nobody else, and as I told to PatriciaR, I am not upset, hot-head, mad, I am so down, and I am very disappointed with Spanish Wikipedia generally with their Spaniards admins, playing to be a judge, and they are not doing their functions as well. If I could explain you why I've been blocked, maybe you can understand, it's shame to know how many registered users have been blocked, and how many articles and administrators are in Spanish wikipedia, you know, that's why I am working only in English and Catalan Wikipedias, but the Spaniard User:Rastrojo just visited my flags on es:wikipedia, and only deleted my flags, and you can find A LOT of proposal flags by Spaniards, and they are not deleted, and unfortunately the social problems between Spaniards and Latin Americans are in Wikipedia, as I said to PatriciaR, I guess this project MediaWiki is a good project and their social problems must not be here. And as he told you above, he can't trust!, who's he to judge me?, this is wrong I guess only God can judge me. I also created a Wikiproject here, the user User:Rastrojo is also an administrator in Spanish Wikipedia, and he's acting like that there, and almost 70% of administrators, I guess there are so many bad administrators, because they are 160 with 434,766 articles, and in English Wikipedia they are more or less the same 150-160 with 2,698,817 articles!!, and clearly something wrong is happening with their rulers in es.wikipedia. French Wikipedia has 750,386 articles with 40-50 administrators. I really appreciate the advice, you know, I really know that I can't do nothing, that's why I said "I wish", because at last, I can't delete my images myself, and it's frustrated.--Heraldicos (talk) 23:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I really...[edit]

...would have to talk to you. It would be quite nice if you could come to the IRC somewhen in the next time. :) abf «Cabale?! Quelle Caballe?» 16:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was on IRC but I got there just as you were leaving. Sorry I missed you. Drop me a mail if you like. ++Lar: t/c 19:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am there again, just made a PC-reboot ;) abf «Cabale?! Quelle Caballe?» 19:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think he means last night. Abigor talk 19:19, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did. I have a bunch of conference calls today but I'll try to catch up. ++Lar: t/c 19:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Input needed on a Wikiversity project[edit]

Hi Lar. I'm trying to get a project started on Wikiversity: Wikipedia and the 2008 US elections‎, which is a research project on how Wikipedia articles are created and improved, particularly when the topic is the subject of strong sentiments and relates to events that change over the time period in the study (probably January 2008 through January 2009, but there's some question about when the campaign actually "began").

I'm leaving you (and a few other folks) this note because you've had some interest in Wikiversity's studies of Wikipedia in the past, I wanted to get a few more eyes on the project before announcing it on Wikipedia: I hope to do that over the next few days on the talk pages of the 4 "beta test" articles: w:Barack Obama, w:John McCain, w:Sarah Palin, and w:Joe Biden, with a broader announcement later after the initial kinks are worked out. I was also hoping you would know people who would be interested in this, as well as knowing people with a few "special skills", including:

  1. Data collection and sorting from the article histories (how many edits and what sorts of edits over a given time period, etc.)
  2. People who can make good graphs and charts from that data
  3. people who can help develop guidelines for whether and how to discuss individual editors if they are felt to be "notable"

I think this could be a very fruitful study: Wikipedia's model of content creation is quite complicated, but it works! --SB_Johnny talk 14:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... sounds like a very interesting project but I'm not sure I have the time to devote. I'll be watching with interest though! ++Lar: t/c 14:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ..[edit]

...for the RFB support. Particularly yours. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to change allowable scope of userpage content[edit]

I have made a proposal to specify more clearly what is and what is not allowed on usepages. You have expressed interest in this issue, and you may wish to comment at Commons_talk:Project_scope/Pages,_galleries_and_categories#The use of userpages to advance personal political opinions. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

a bit more about nudity and sexual content[edit]

G'day Lar - and thanks for re-iterating your advice over on en - I also noticed Avruch pick this up at Jimbo's talk page, which I thought you might be interested in.

Further to your advice, I wondered what you think about this proposal, particularly in the light of previous deletion discussions like this? cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 02:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the conversation here is progressing fairly usefully... your advice and input would be wonderful! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 07:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Bots/Requests for flags/LinkFA-Bot[edit]

Is this bot not working any longer? I heard rumours it was defunct already or something.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see a contrib from it on 21 January. Maybe ask the operator? I think all it does is one edit a day, per design (per the request text), unless more wikis ask the operator to also start causing images to be protected... The operator said he/she was open to that IIRC. ++Lar: t/c 02:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete own discussion page?[edit]

Hello Lar, I want to ask you if it is allowed to delete your own disscusion page in COMMONS, and if I found a user who made this action, how can I report it?. --Heraldicos (talk) 05:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It may not be good form, but there is no particular policy against, if you are in good standing, deleting all content ("blanking") or even using admin powers to delete the entire user talk page.... someone who does is considered to have read whatever was presented to them there so it's not a shield against warnings of behaviour. If someone is not in good standing and is doing it to be disruptive that's different. Does that help? ++Lar: t/c 21:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you once again. Yes it helps, I helped him to move his archive and I told him won't blank his user page. --Heraldicos (talk) 01:35, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hmmmm...[edit]

I dunno... I'm getting a deeper understanding lately that something's up.... and quite likely the problem lies with me! - regardless, here's a plea for a 'sanity' check... am I getting over involved, losing perspective, and just generally not making much sense, or is there something 'just a bit wrong' about some images herein? Right now, I'm not really sure that 'consensus' makes some of this ok at all - and would seriously value your thoughts. Privatemusings (talk) 11:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I'm not sure how best to resolve this, but an image such as File:Plaża w Śródmiesciu (dzielnica Gdyni) - 023.JPG (picking one at random) strikes me as perhaps technically inside the privacy/nudity guidelines (it's an image taken in a public place where there is no specific reason to believe in an explicit privacy right) but yet... is not quite right... it's a "downblouse" which in general, at least to me, isn't really very respectful, even if technically allowable. Not EVERY image in that gallery is 'wrong' but some certainly have that problem. Further, I'm not seeing the encyclopedic value of that image... it's apparently not used anywhere: [1] ++Lar: t/c 16:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To respond bit by bit - I totally agree that most of the pics don't really raise any problems at all. In terms of the not-so-cool images though I'm not really sure the 'what's the value' argument holds much water - for example, a (future) wikibook titled 'The growth of voyeurism following the digital revolution' could, to my mind have merit, and be appropriately illustrated by such images - it doesn't really speak to the general vibe of the images for me.
The crux of the matter for me lies with permission of the subject being obtained where an image could be reasonably seen as an intrusion. Upskirts, downblouses, and nudity on the beach fall into this category in my view. You can see here though that, at least in the deletion discussions, this view doesn't gain traction. You've further witnessed the resistance to incorporate a general statement at a policy page.
The end result is that images are hosted which I believe can reasonably be seen as intrusive, and that's what's 'not quite right'. I may yet be in a minority of one on this, but feel that there's a little bit of a prism effect at some discussions. If this is the case, then strong leadership would likely be required to try and move forward. There are a reasonable large number of images which suffer these problems, in my view. Privatemusings (talk) 22:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mattbuck[edit]

A few weeks ago I deleted several images of Klashorst using your deletion request for one of the images for them all since they had the same problem. The discussion at Village_Pump#Klashorst.3F_.28again_and_again.29 resulted in restoring many of them again and making normal deletion requests for them. One of the first users to participate in the discussion and clearly showing his opinion was Mattbuck. He also restored the images. Now one week has passed and mattbuck closed several of those Klashorst-delreqs, he had not restored himself before despite being clearly involved in the whole matter and clearly not neutral. Others where closed by Christan Bier whose neutrality was questioned here COM:UNDEL#Request_for_checking_a_del_request_decision by an IP. Is this really what Commons is all about? A few admins who use there power as they want? -- Cecil (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cecil, first off, I would like to say I am disappointed in that you did not come and talk to me about my actions. I thought you'd quit anyway. As for why I closed them, another admin closed the DRs originally, and Martina reopened them, as far as I could tell on the basis that she didn't like the fact it was closed as keep 12 hours earlier. I trusted that the admin who closed it did so having reviewed the case thoroughly. A renomination so soon just seemed like sour grapes to me. -mattbuck (Talk) 04:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and Lar, the cases in question are Commons:Deletion requests/File:Smoke (by Peter Klashorst).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Happy Dutch beauty.jpg. -mattbuck (Talk) 04:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why would I quit? It's my good right to take a wikibreak if I want one. But it's good to know that you trust somebody who threatened the people involved in the Klashorst-matter with blocking them indefinitely just for creating the deletion requests. ChristianBier is a user who just a few month ago had to close his forth RfA at de.WP without success, this time because of massive copyvios from Commons and other WP-projects, something that after I had published that fact resulted in lots of people changing their vote from support to oppose; a previous one was lost because of legal threats. But I can understand why you trust him, after all he is of the same opinion as you so he has to be trustable. So there really is no reason to wonder why somebody reopens a deletion request. You definitely did not ask Martina Nolte why she would not accept a decision by ChristianBier by whom she was threatened only a few days before. -- Cecil (talk) 05:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
with apologies for sticking my oar in (well, it's kind of already in, but please do feel free just to remove my comments if you think they're unlikely to help, lar) - it strikes me that if we can resolve some of the issues we're touching on in the thread above this one, then the 'klashorst' situation may be largely fixed too... it's clearly been upsetting and polarising for many, which is a real shame for this community. It's my view that many Klashorst images should be deleted. Privatemusings (talk) 05:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cecil, what people do on de.wp is pretty much irrelevant to Commons, as well you know. As to Christian threatening people, if that happened as you say, then I had no idea. I just saw another admin close the DR. Admittedly I thought it was closed too simply - there should have been an explanation - but it was closed by an admin, and therefore someone who has engendered trust in the commons community. As for your comments on your talk page, as to my not "being welcome" there - I find your behaviour rather insulting. You are a bureaucrat, your talk page is for people to contact you. If Christian missed the legal consequences, fine, reopen the original DR, I have no problem with that. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know people get mad when I ask for melllowness. So I won't. I'll just say we need to resolve this, somehow, it continues to cause bad feelings. What can we do to work together to figure out how to resolve this in a way that is respectful of the photograph subjects, photographers, contributors, and users of the images? Because that's what we need to do. Somehow. I'll help to the best of my ability and time. ++Lar: t/c 16:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally it should be not forgotten (I will not - that's for sure) that Mattbuck (with some help of commons-admin-within-5-weeks-Kanonkas , 3+1Diti and Herby) has kicked out User:Mutter Erde, the probably hardest worker on commons, only to prevent his own deadmin. Mutter Erde 78.51.31.232 11:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I agree with this view, whoever you are. ++Lar: t/c 11:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a thorny issue. I think some of us had hoped that the recent rewrite of some of the policy pages would help. We can't solve it here, but we need to solve it somewhere. Coming at it piecemeal, one or two images at a time, as we have been might be why there's friction. I am really sorry I missed the recent thread at Commons:Village Pump#Klashorst? (again and again) and the undel request COM:UNDEL#Request_for_checking_a_del_request_decision... if I had I would have spoken out there, I'm not sure I agree with the outcomes. I don't want to blunder in and reopen things needlessly but it looks like maybe we haven't sorted this yet, have we? ++Lar: t/c 11:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

there's a sort-of related conversation here fwiw Privatemusings (talk) 20:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lar[edit]

File:Brain_met.jpg underwent a deletion discussion Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Brain met.jpg that struck me as unusual. The file is of a CT scan ordered by me, done at a private CT facility, of a long-time patient of mine that signed consent for me to use it for whatever purposes I desire -- I uploaded it to en, someone moved it to commons. The crux of the deletion discussion linked to this one is that x-ray images can only be released if the person who took the x-rays (i.e. the technologist? or the owner of the facility?) releases it. This strikes me as unusual. Can you clarify or let me know how it can be clarified? Thanks very much -- Samir (talk) 00:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am probably not an expert on this but consider a regular photograph of a person... for us to host it we need:
  1. permission of the subject, or a reason to believe that permission is not required (for example a non controversial pose in a clearly public place with no restrictions on photography clearly is such, there are others)
  2. A valid license. The license is usually granted by the photographer or their assignee (in the case of a work for hire...)
Note that, for example, taking a photograph using a red filter does nothing to change the above two requirements. This case is exactly analogous... it's just a different type of photograph or representation, in my view. So the permission you secured covers 1) but not 2)... that license needs to be granted by the person who took the image (the x-ray technician) or by the facility (the presumed assignee of the work for hire). Can you secure that license? LMK if this doesn't make sense, I'll point you in the direction of where this sort of thing gets discussed further (start at COM:LICENSING and follow the links) ++Lar: t/c 04:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Lar. It seems quite different than the case where I normally get permission to use x-rays, (i.e. research publications) where the standard is usually: (1) patient consent and release and (2) release by the lead author (as representative of the institution where the image was created). Getting the CT tech to grant the license is impossible (and I don't think that using the analogy that the tech "took the picture" is valid). CT's are essentially works-for-hire on order of the physician. I'll look at COM:LICENSING and try to sort through things. Thanks -- Samir (talk) 17:09, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! I did not think of it that way. If it is pretty clear that the physician ordered the scan, and that the tech and the facility are merely carrying out instructions, and your agreement with the facility doesn't leave residual copyright rights (such as no republication) with them, then yes... YOU are the author and copyright controller. You just need to make that case, clearly enough, and I think you're golden. ++Lar: t/c 19:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photographs of identifiable people again[edit]

I have made some changes to Commons:Photographs of identifiable people/Proposal in response to a variety of helpful suggestions that users have made on the talk page. You have already commented there; could I ask you to have a look again, and to consider whether you would like to express an opinion in the Poll towards the bottom of the page? Many thanks. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tip[edit]

(refactored to User talk:Thomas Gun) ++Lar: t/c 15:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ad = voting?[edit]

(refactored to User_talk:Deathgleaner per w:User:Lar/Pooh policy) ++Lar: t/c 13:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why? (Third try)[edit]

I would say this is a threat or? Until now no answer. And by the way: I can give difflinks Mutter Erde (talk) 10:00, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mutter Erde: Statements such as this [2] are not acceptable. Please don't do such again. ++Lar: t/c 04:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHY ? Mutter Erde (talk) 08:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I tell you a statement you made is "not acceptable", and ask you to stop, that is not a threat. It is an admonishment, given in my function as an administrator here. If it later leads to you being blocked, that still does not make it a threat, just an administrative action. Hope that clears this matter up for you. I'd strongly suggest that you not evade your block by using an IP address. That's not a threat either. ++Lar: t/c 13:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

92.226.213.73[edit]

Hello,

How are you doing, we didn't speak for a long time.

I have a check user reqeust for you. Can you confirm that this ip is connected with Mutter Ede.

Best regards, Abigor talk 15:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As he generally "signs" it as himself I assume it is him without worrying about CU. Equally he is still working at creating galleries as well ("presented by Mutter Erde" IIRC). As he pointed out to me on en wp his isp is the largest over some large area - it didn't interest me so I didn't pay attention :) --Herby talk thyme 15:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lar/Archive_8&oldid=26514483"