User talk:Jeff G./Archives/2022/January

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Jeff G.. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I just ran into some stuff while researching a local file. (which is also on Alamy somewhere, that's how I got sidetracked) You've shown interest in this in the past so I'll share just in case you're still interested:

• c:File:Bombing of Dresden aftermath (36443580155).png is a colorization from Flickr. Black and white attributed to "Walter Hahn/AFP/Getty" by the Irish Times (AFP) / Pictorial Press Ltd on Alamy claims CC BY-SA,3.0 de for the black and white. This is weird, Pictorial Press doesn't appear to be a Wikimedia scraper. Maybe it's from Deutsche Fotothek, at least that would match the license, but I can't find it. I have no idea what's going on here.
• Gilded stupa and a prajnaparamita on Alamy by "CPA Media Pte Ltd" is c:File:Museum of Ethnology Vienna 005.JPG. This is unambiguously CC BY-SA 3.0/GFDL. So if anyone (like Vysotsky maybe based on c:Commons:Forum/Archiv/2019/July) still believed BY-SA would protect your photos from being sold on Alamy, they're mistaken. This is possibly legal. The omission of an actual link to the license is likely minor enough to be overseen (legally, depends on the used interpretation of "reasonable to the medium") as the license abbreviation is there and the name of the author is clearly indicated. What's missing is a source link, but the license requires "to the extent reasonably practicable, the URI, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work". Does uploading a file to Wikimedia Commons mean you "specify a URI to be associated with the Work"? I'll probably ask Legal about that. {{Not public domain}} would provide protection from this as it clearly associates the link/filename with the work.
• Banska Stiavnica on Alamy by Jonathan ORourke is a copy of File:Banska Stiavnica- pohlad z Katovej ulice.jpg, but this appears to be a simple case of the wrong license tag on Commons, causing their scraper to include it.

I already wasted too much time on this, I just got sidetracked. Do with this information what you want, I need to get back to work on User:Alexis Jazz/Bawl. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexis Jazz (talk • contribs) 21:35, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: Thanks for that info, it's a lot to unpack.   — Jeff G. ツ 00:27, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi. When can I change my username again? Thanks. Firebanana (talk) 15:14, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

@Firebanana: June 2022, but I told you that already.   — Jeff G. ツ 15:24, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Make that Never per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cambria Math.   — Jeff G. ツ 00:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Template:Lanlp 1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm telling you this because I like you. c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Jefftemp is the kind of thing that contributes to an RfA failing. You can't delete Wikipedia humor/criticism with hundreds of uses combined. It is not up to the party being criticized to determine what is or isn't acceptable. If Wikimedia projects can't deal with criticism/humor, it's over. We'd be no better than YouTube. Actually we'd be worse, as I haven't actually caught YouTube deleting criticism of themselves on their platform. And I know plenty of YouTubers who are shitting on YouTube on a regular basis. If a commercial company can deal with it, Wikimedia should certainly be able to handle this. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 19:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Jefftemp#Files in Category:Jefftemp (Adminpedia files) is dead now, many days before it's time.   — Jeff G. ツ 10:26, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

dear sir,

i am an academic professor with large h and g-index I am ieee fellow, I was recipient of cisco and google awards, author of TCP Westwood referred on Wikipedia.

I wrote my personal page but was deleted.

Saverio Mascolo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saverio mascolo (talk • contribs) 17:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Saverio mascolo: Yes, it was deleted because it was self-promotional. See WP:AUTO.   — Jeff G. ツ 20:16, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

yes, but all data were with an url poibting to other sites to be verified. it was a short bio such as the one reported in journal papers, very short and essential

best regards saverio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saverio mascolo (talk • contribs) 20:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Saverio mascolo: Evidently, Explicit felt differently. Sign your posts and stop making unnecessary misplaced new sections.   — Jeff G. ツ 22:37, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

I can't add a custom edit summary when I create a redirect page with Wikiplus. --Txkk (talk) 15:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Txkk: The Wikiplus redirect creation edits don't concern me.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

So, why did you notify me (Special:Diff/1053959889)? --Txkk (talk) 03:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

@Txkk: The other edits.   — Jeff G. ツ 11:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)