User talk:Stifle: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:58, 3 March 2010 editBehnamFarid (talk \| contribs)6,317 edits →On the image of Michael Foot ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:46, 4 March 2010 edit undoBehnamFarid (talk \| contribs)6,317 edits →On the image of Michael Foot Next edit →
Line 81:		Line 81:
	:: I made ''no'' assumption! If you read what I have written to Milburn, then you will notice that I have made the effort that I am supposed to have made (you, and Milburn, would prove me wrong if you came up with a free image, but you have not). Milburn's argument is that free images ''may'' become available in future, but nowhere have I said anything to the contrary; I have said that as soon as that becomes the case, my present copyright statement becomes invalid and the present image will have to be replaced by the available free image. We cannot predict the future and we cannot presuppose that free images will necessarily become available. In fact, going by Milburn's argument, the question arises as to the meaning of the type of copyright tag that I have used. Why has such a tag been made at all and what purpose is it supposed to serve? Kind regards, ].		:: I made ''no'' assumption! If you read what I have written to Milburn, then you will notice that I have made the effort that I am supposed to have made (you, and Milburn, would prove me wrong if you came up with a free image, but you have not). Milburn's argument is that free images ''may'' become available in future, but nowhere have I said anything to the contrary; I have said that as soon as that becomes the case, my present copyright statement becomes invalid and the present image will have to be replaced by the available free image. We cannot predict the future and we cannot presuppose that free images will necessarily become available. In fact, going by Milburn's argument, the question arises as to the meaning of the type of copyright tag that I have used. Why has such a tag been made at all and what purpose is it supposed to serve? Kind regards, ].
	::: I have explained it in my writing to Milburn: searched the Internet in the time available to me (used Google image and Google web, and looked through a number of online publications pertaining to Michael Foot). Please note that if tomorrow someone, e.g. Milburn, comes up with a free image, then by all means s/he should not hesitate to replace the present image. In my understanding, this is the way Misplaced Pages is supposed to evolve. I have used a particular copyright tag and attached some additional remarks to it; if at some future date any of these no longer applies, then of course the associated image should be removed. Milburn has not shown that any of the statements in the copyright statement of the image at issue were false, yet on the basis of some possible future developments has both removed the image from the biography and tagged the image for deletion. He had a point if he had shown that my statements were false; all he needed to do was coming up with a free image (as I have written to him, the onus is on him to prove me wrong, not on me to prove that there are no free images anywhere to be found --- I have simply a limited amount of time to spend on Misplaced Pages-related issues and I have spent the reasonable amount of effort that I am supposed to have spent before undertaking to upload the image). ]		::: I have explained it in my writing to Milburn: searched the Internet in the time available to me (used Google image and Google web, and looked through a number of online publications pertaining to Michael Foot). Please note that if tomorrow someone, e.g. Milburn, comes up with a free image, then by all means s/he should not hesitate to replace the present image. In my understanding, this is the way Misplaced Pages is supposed to evolve. I have used a particular copyright tag and attached some additional remarks to it; if at some future date any of these no longer applies, then of course the associated image should be removed. Milburn has not shown that any of the statements in the copyright statement of the image at issue were false, yet on the basis of some possible future developments has both removed the image from the biography and tagged the image for deletion. He had a point if he had shown that my statements were false; all he needed to do was coming up with a free image (as I have written to him, the onus is on him to prove me wrong, not on me to prove that there are no free images anywhere to be found --- I have simply a limited amount of time to spend on Misplaced Pages-related issues and I have spent the reasonable amount of effort that I am supposed to have spent before undertaking to upload the image). ]
			:::: Dear Stifle, I should be most grateful if you would let ] know that he should leave me in peace. He seems to have decided to exert undue pressure on me, and I have just left him a message , asking him to stop making himself a nuisance to me (the issue with regard to the photograph of ] was dealt with days ago by ] --- Milburn had tagged it for deletion! he seems out on a vendetta). Please just count the number of unsolicited messages that he has left on my page in response to ''my'' correspondence with ''you'', leaving me mystified as to his purpose. Why has he decided to play the boss here? Who is he at all? Why does he feel entitled to keep writing to me that I did not understand this and that, etc.? A student from Lancaster is supposed to behave more respectfully towards those who might be older than his father! I had unequivocally told him that I would leave the matter to your judgement and did not wish to discuss the issue with regard to the photograph of Michael Foot with him any longer. Yet, he just kept writing to me! An now, tagging the image of Ebrahim Pourdavoud for deletion for good measure? ]

	==Recent change you made==		==Recent change you made==

Revision as of 02:46, 4 March 2010

Due to being busy with real life, I am, for the foreseeable future, doing very little work here other than OTRS tickets and a few articles that I'm improving.

Welcome to my talk page. Please read my Frequently Asked Questions, which may answer your question.

Replies

Please reply to me here if possible.
If your message is about an AFD or other discussion that you want me to (re)contribute to, I will generally not reply other than by checking the page and adding a comment.
I will normally reply here and copy my reply to your talk page, but may sometimes use {{talkback}} or, occasionally, reply here only.
Please don't leave your email address. My email address is user.stiflegmail.com, but please don't email me anything that isn't confidential or sensitive (unless you're blocked or I'm away and not responding). I check my email far less often than my talk page, so leaving a message here is significantly more likely to get a quick reply. I find that offwiki messages are contrary to the open and clear communication that I prefer, and if you email me with a non-confidential request, I will reply to you onwiki.
- Exception: if you are requesting the text of a deleted article, then make sure your preferences include a valid, confirmed email address, as I will email the article to you at that address (only).

TV3 Medford Page

Misplaced Pages is being used by the television station, Medford Community Cablevision, Inc. (under the alias TV3 Medford, which the Misplaced Pages page is titled) to promote information that is not factual. A public access station belongs to the people who fund it, not the "non-profit" which has a temporary agreement to oversee the facility. In Medford, Massachusetts the non-profit has a long history of conflict of interest, an entrenched board of directors who refuse to hold a city wide election for the station, a board which has been audited and evaluated by a retired judge (at the request of the city). Notice how the page has many "contributions" which are self-serving rather than encyclopedia-styled information found on other Public Access TV stations. Here are some helpful links:

the report published by Medford City Hall http://www.wickedlocal.com/medford/news/x774169733

City Solicitor Mark E. Rumley's Report http://insidemedford.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/city-solicitors-report-to-mayor-mcglynn-on-medford-community-cablevision.pdf

Here are pertinent articles which should be posted on the site:

Boston Globe site:

Medford cable TV board filmed its own movies, excluded public http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/medford/2009/08/judge_says_tv3_board_must_make.html

Medford Transcript - a weekly established newspaper owned by CNC, the national Gatehouse media Judge Issues Recommendations for TV3 http://www.wickedlocal.com/medford/news/x2145957005/BREAKING-NEWS-Judge-issues-recommendations-for-TV3

Judge Issues Scathing Report on TV 3 http://insidemedford.com/2009/08/12/judge-issues-scathing-report-against-tv3/

Board member of TV 3 Speaks http://insidemedford.com/2009/08/23/tv3so-now-what/

TV3 and Community Outreach http://insidemedford.com/2009/06/10/tv3-needs-to-do-more-community-outreach/

TV3 Sues the City http://www.wickedlocal.com/medford/news/x1772954806/TV3-sues-city-for-57k-in-fees

Please watch the page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/TV3_Medford

Misplaced Pages is being used by the station to promote information that is not factual.

thank you. Originalandnew (talk) 14:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)OriginalandnewOriginalandnew (talk) 14:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Not sure why you're telling me this. Stifle (talk) 21:19, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Weak fair use; complaint

Hi, Stifle. :) I wanted to check with you about File:Tiffany's november 1980.jpg and File:Tiffany's dance hall overview.jpg. After a question on my talk page about them, I see that we not only have an incredibly weak fair use (the images aren't even in the article, but in a footnote), but the image host (not copyright holder) has objected. Is DfU the best approach here? Or is there a more expedited process? --Moonriddengirl 15:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

DFU is as quick as it gets unless you want to go for deleting per WP:ROUGE =] Stifle (talk) 15:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Oooh, no. I'm afraid I lack the required rakishness for the role. :) I'll stick with DFU! Thanks. --Moonriddengirl 15:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

On the image of Michael Foot

Dear Stifle, I should be most grateful if you would kindly take a look into this and this and resolve the problem. With kind regards, --BF 18:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC).

Further to the above request, could you please also have a look here? Is tagging the image for deletion justified? --BF 18:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I made no assumption! If you read what I have written to Milburn, then you will notice that I have made the effort that I am supposed to have made (you, and Milburn, would prove me wrong if you came up with a free image, but you have not). Milburn's argument is that free images may become available in future, but nowhere have I said anything to the contrary; I have said that as soon as that becomes the case, my present copyright statement becomes invalid and the present image will have to be replaced by the available free image. We cannot predict the future and we cannot presuppose that free images will necessarily become available. In fact, going by Milburn's argument, the question arises as to the meaning of the type of copyright tag that I have used. Why has such a tag been made at all and what purpose is it supposed to serve? Kind regards, --BF 20:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC).

I have explained it in my writing to Milburn: searched the Internet in the time available to me (used Google image and Google web, and looked through a number of online publications pertaining to Michael Foot). Please note that if tomorrow someone, e.g. Milburn, comes up with a free image, then by all means s/he should not hesitate to replace the present image. In my understanding, this is the way Misplaced Pages is supposed to evolve. I have used a particular copyright tag and attached some additional remarks to it; if at some future date any of these no longer applies, then of course the associated image should be removed. Milburn has not shown that any of the statements in the copyright statement of the image at issue were false, yet on the basis of some possible future developments has both removed the image from the biography and tagged the image for deletion. He had a point if he had shown that my statements were false; all he needed to do was coming up with a free image (as I have written to him, the onus is on him to prove me wrong, not on me to prove that there are no free images anywhere to be found --- I have simply a limited amount of time to spend on Misplaced Pages-related issues and I have spent the reasonable amount of effort that I am supposed to have spent before undertaking to upload the image). --BF 20:58, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Dear Stifle, I should be most grateful if you would let User:Milburn know that he should leave me in peace. He seems to have decided to exert undue pressure on me, and I have just left him a message here, asking him to stop making himself a nuisance to me (the issue with regard to the photograph of Ebrahim Pourdavoud was dealt with days ago by User:Feydey --- Milburn had tagged it for deletion! he seems out on a vendetta). Please just count the number of unsolicited messages that he has left on my page in response to my correspondence with you, leaving me mystified as to his purpose. Why has he decided to play the boss here? Who is he at all? Why does he feel entitled to keep writing to me that I did not understand this and that, etc.? A student from Lancaster is supposed to behave more respectfully towards those who might be older than his father! I had unequivocally told him that I would leave the matter to your judgement and did not wish to discuss the issue with regard to the photograph of Michael Foot with him any longer. Yet, he just kept writing to me! An now, tagging the image of Ebrahim Pourdavoud for deletion for good measure? --BF 02:46, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Recent change you made

Hi Stifle, you made a recent change on Herbal Magic page in response to an inquiry I made through email. Unfortunately, Eileenabc has gone back in an made the changes backs. I'm not certain what my next steps are but it seems that no matter what proper procedure is followed, this user continues to make changes back. --Luna sky (talk) 18:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I've left her a warning. Stifle (talk) 19:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)