Incheon Airport Pictures
Hello, Yes i did take the pictures myself. All the other pictures i've uploaded and added to airport pages were taken by me too. I added the PD tag to all the images. I hope that clears up any copyright or source issues.
Thanks. sikander 05:16, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
Since you seem to be interested in the airline stuff, here is a request for help.
I started to put together the how you get a ticket to fly and the associated process. Some of it uses generic terms like a paper ticket and e-ticket.
Any thoughts on how to arrange this so that it is not spread out and is in a logical place? What pages should be created and what should they be named? This is even more confusing these days since you need a boarding pass and not a ticket to get through security at US airports. Vegaswikian 21:44, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
RE:Airport Infobox template
Hey Burgundavia (I like that name). I realise that the airport infobox isn't yet ready for universal implementation, but I thought it a worthwhile edition to the major Australian airports. I had no intention of adding it to all Australian airports, for the time being at least. It was hard enough to find the stats for the major aiports, let alone attempting the minors. For the templates you've created, great work! I did a little bit of re-arranging for the Australian airports - "Closest Town"/"Distance from" changed to city and IATA/ICAO codes moved lower. I've now created Template:Infobox Australian Airport, as Clarkk mentioned, based on that hybrid infobox, but have yet to implement it.
Now, I'm the first to admit that I know next to nothing about template syntax. I work around this by using various exemplars. But having two separate templates, one for stats and one for runways, sounds like an awful complication. And I don't see how this will change the problem of some airports having more runways then others - though I am perhaps blinded by my inexperience. However, this idea does make sense for smaller airports, where it might be very hard to get information on either. Nevertheless, I think there should be one infobox in, say, four different versions: v1 2 runways; v2 3 runways; v3 4 runways; and, v4 5 runways. This is what I may do with Template:Infobox Australian Airport, though only two versions would be required. Thoughts?--Cyberjunkie 03:01, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Could this not then be done in a single infobox?--Cyberjunkie 03:21, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
It sounds good, but still, functionability/user-friendliness is a concern. So your planning to make a test template? If so, will it be in the style already used. I'd like to see the changes I made to the Australian infobox carry through.--Cyberjunkie 03:41, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- From a user, it is not going to look different, it is just going to be more flexible. Burgundavia 03:48, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
The statistics should remain attached to the Infobox in my opinion. As for the airport weblink, I'm not particularly fussed either way. I made that addition to the infobox because it seemed a nifty feature, and one included in some other infoboxes I've worked on. I've seen the progress you've made, and all seems well. Although, once your more prepared, the WikiProject Airport infobox page may need to be better organised and more instructive. Also, I think that changing the "Closest town"/"City" to "Serves" is a very good compromise. I might suggest, however, you change "Distance from town" to "Distance from CBD".--Cyberjunkie 08:19, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
So you're saying that there will be a separate table for the statistics? I can't find anything on the WikiProject Airport pages that sets out any sort of standard layout. If that is what you meant, I'd advise against it. Generally, the airport articles are not large enough to warrant the use of more than one table. The infobox seems sufficient. The stats currently comprise only two facts anyways. Of course, if you mean that the stats are going to be included within the written article, that is appropriate. With regards to the external link, as I've said, I don't care if it is removed. I was just explaining why I included it in the first place. The only thing that I am disagreeing with you on, is the "Distance from" section. Town is erroneous terminology. CBD is universally understood, though admittedly in more common usage in the Commonwealth countries. As for it being too technical, I think that is negligible, especially within an infobox citing ICAO/IATA. CBD is the correct term, and one that is applicable to all airports. Anyone who requires clarification can follow the link (the point of a wiki) and see its near-equivalent 'downtown'.--Cyberjunkie 03:49, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Righto! Lost of lost titles, perhaps? Fire Star 04:47, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Re: Nagoya Airport
Currently Aichi Prefecture owns the civil part of the airport. Centrair is owned by a for-profit company. "Prefectural" prefix can be used to distinguish it from Centrair and is for probably public relation and promotion by the prefectural government. It will not likely to appear in English document. NKM's official name by the national government Ministry of Land. Infrastructure and Transport is "Nagoya Airport" (名古屋飛行場 Nagoya Hikōjō). I suggest that the latter better denotes current status. Hikojo often translates aerodrome or airfield. I will update following this. Soredewa 05:15, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)
Re: Paine Field
thanks! it took me about a year to realize that my home airport wasn't in the wikipedia, so i fixed it. i basically just edit/create aircraft articles, so i didn't know what the various templates were. thanks for cleaning it up. -eric 17:02, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment on my talk page. I think I understand the distinctions you want to make. For international vs. domestic, the real concern is whether there are customs/immigration services available. If so, the airport is an airport of entry (AoE). GA vs. commercial is tricky, because a lot of general aviation is commercial: think of flight training, charter and air taxi, crop dusting, pipeline inspection, air ambulance, aerial surveying, traffic reporting, aerial photography, etc. etc. The real question, I think, is whether an airport has scheduled passenger service or not. So here's my suggestion:
- Type: (public|private|military)
- Airport of entry? (yes|no)
- Scheduled passenger service? (yes|no)
Here's how the four major New York City airports would shake out ...
- Type: public
- Airport of entry? yes
- Scheduled passenger service? yes
- Type: public
- Airport of entry? no
- Scheduled passenger service? yes
- Type: public
- Airport of entry? yes
- Scheduled passenger service? yes
- Type: public
- Airport of entry? yes
- Scheduled passenger service? no
-- David 11:55, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
Airports of New York City
I'm not sure it's a good idea to include Airports of New York City as a subcategory of Airports of New York, because Airports of New York refers to New York state, while Airports of New York City covers airports in New York State, New Jersey, and potentially Connecticut (though there are not currently any in the part of Connecticut close to NYC; White Plains is almost in Connecticut). David 13:37, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
Corey, can you please take a look at the RfC page for User:SamuraiClinton and advise me where the heck we go from here with this user? This is without question the weirdest Wikipedia situation I've ever found myself in. Thanks! - Lucky 6.9 04:07, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 14:01, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah! Ditto that! I almost forgot!! Anyway, thanks for getting back to me. Raul654 is too busy to investigate and he suggested Snowspinner as a source of additional help. Looking forward to hearing from you soon. - Lucky 6.9 17:26, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Santa Cruz Sky Park copyvio?
You flagged a page, just wanted to comment that the much of that timeline was taken from the following public record, my understanding would be that City Council Meeting public records would not be protected by copyright. Your thoughts?
Appendix A (pp. A-1 - A-4) of the Santa Cruz Sky Park Airport Master Plan Report, Santa Cruz City Council, 1979.
I referenced the URL just because that was the only other online source for that text and provided it to aid others in further research on other issues. Would I be better to simply reference the Santa Cruz City Council report and leave off the URL? What steps do I take to remove the copyvio notice? DanDawson 18:29, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, just wondering, what is the process for getting rid of the copyvio notice on Santa Cruz Sky Park? Since we've confirmed permission was granted do I just replace the page myself?
- Santa Cruz Sky Park/Temp is updated and ready to go.DanDawson 21:53, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hey just got your message about relicensing some of my images, I'd be happy to do so, I looked around but didn't see a straight forward way to do so...any tips? --Nathaniel
Hi, you asked about the source of a bunch of Pan Am 103 images. Could you be more explicit about what you want to know? Most of the information on the image pages is self-explanatory: govt docs (PD), photos released by the court (PD), or widely available photographs allowable under fair use because we're an educational site. Perhaps you could put a note on the image talk page for each saying exactly what you need, and I'll track down the information for you. Best, SlimVirgin (talk) 09:01, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
- I think some of them have that. Please put a note on the image talk pages saying what you want exactly, although note that if an image is very widely available (e.g. the photos of the cockpit, the accused, and the memorials), then there's not much point in having a website to link to, as there are hundreds, and it would just be a question of randomly picking one. SlimVirgin (talk) 09:08, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
- All these images are solid, believe me. There's no one who would want to sue, and if they did, there are thousands of commercial websites they'd have to wade through before they reached us. But say what you need on each page, and I'll dig it up for you. Best, SlimVirgin (talk) 09:17, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Please do not add the unverified tag to my images again. I have asked you to say exactly what you need on each image talk page, and when you've done that, I'll track down the material for you, but as things stand, I don't understand what you want. For example, the wanted poster of the PA 103 suspects: tens of thousands of these were distributed by the American govt around the Middle East. The particular photograph of them that I've used was released about 12 years ago by the American government. The image is PD without question, and I'm confused as to why you would doubt it. If you leave your specific concerns on the image talk pages, I'll do my best to address them. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 00:01, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply, Corey. Some of the images were taken by the U.S. govt and are PD; some were taken by the British govt but were released by them; the rest can be claimed as fair use as it's an important historical event, we are an educational website, and the copyright holders' do not stand to lose money because of the images' use. I also know roughly where I got the images from. So give me a day or two and I'll add the information and sources to the pages. Best, SlimVirgin (talk) 07:24, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
I thought I did that as two separate edits. Strange. My apologies.
- I just checked; I did remove the resolution text as a separate edit. Please check your usage of the history tool. Kelly Martin 13:18, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
Kelly Martin 13:14, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
This image is Public domain as it is old enough according to Spanish laws, also the original is mine.
Image Copyright:::Ram gopal varma film.jpg.
This image has been taken from a fansite. When I contacted the webmaster of the site, came to know that the source of this picture is unknown and this fansite has no copyright on that image. Let me know how to proceed now.
I am practicing uploading jpg files.
Image:XB9002 Crossbuck Black Trk on Yellow Small.jpg is something I drew myself both drawing wise and concept wise. I thought that I had written a description for it, when it asked for one at upload.
Last time that I looked this .jpg file was not displaying correctly in Talk:Crossbuck Safety
Tabletop 09:00, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for weighing in on this issue. I can't begin to tell you how badly I felt "yelling" at an autistic individual. How can we close the RfC, assuming it isn't already closed? Android79 initiated it, BTW. He feels the same way I do. - Lucky 6.9 18:15, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- No sweat. I think this is pretty much a done deal anyway. I am so glad this is over! - Lucky 6.9 23:59, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Regarding Shul.jpg and Rabbi Goldberger.jpg, I took both of those photos myself, and I own the copyrights.
I have now updated the 2 image file pages with this information.
Tzadik 23:21, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
I think there is some confusion. The scan is a page from the original Russian out of a book that ceased publication in 1906 which can be seen from the Darmouth website. The book from 1990 you referred to is an English translation of this Russian work but the english page is not scanned so this should not be an issue. I hope that clears everything up. Thank you for your inquiry. Jonesboy1983 22:42, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Re: Image Copyright
Gardner image Hi Burgundavia, I obtained the image with permission from a friend who was writing a piece on Howard Gardner for an internal firm newsletter. She adapted the photo from an open database (and didnt use it in preference for another), which has permission for posting by anyone.
Pictures going blank.
Viewing some of my Crossbuck Safety pictures from work, some of the pictures (#3, #4, #5) were blank. Nothing there except a border. Later on, from home, the pictures were all back again.
Can you explain what is going on?
Tabletop 10:35, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I tagged my file under public domain. But I don't understand what you mean by the PUI page or how to get a licencse for a file. Thanks for your help. --Jonesboy1983 15:40, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
on your message about my picture i uploaded for labrea tarpits. My dad shot that on one of his geological field trips.
still getting used to this... the one big thing i did right under a runescape subgroup was replaced with IAMGAY over and over again... I used to live in Trinidad, so hopefully i can add alot of pictures to all of the existing Trinidad related topics. Curran919
Yes, and thanks for understanding.ekimdrachir 17:34 23 Apr 2005
What's wrong with Albertans?
Wait a second... Redknecks, Cowboys, Ralph Klein... Nevermind. Fortunetly I am none of those things.
How do you do a timestamp?
Thanks. ekimdrachir 23:47, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome, question though..
Thanks for welcoming me. Have a question though, you marked my [image] that I intend to use shortly on my user page. However, that image I made myself with elements taken from other images that used in Fair Use. Can you recommend what Tag I should use for it? And what should I then do to have it removed from deletion?
- Edited the above image and applied the licence. The other image though I have left untouched since I have already marked it for deletion. Uploaded the wrong image! o_-; Thanks for the help. - Nidonocu 00:09, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'm a rookie so I didn't want to screw up by unilateral action, and you seemed to take an interest in these matters. HS-2000is a direct copy and paste job from . The article cites the website as source - but the website asserts its copyright. --Doc Glasgow 00:15, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ok I'll be bolder next time - I looked the list of copyvios for someone who had recently worked on one or two --Doc Glasgow 00:25, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well, some of the stuff there I nominated somewhat, though not entirely blindly. Knowing that an admin would have to look at the history and inbound links on each one anyway, I decided to leave it up to them to decide whether or not the nomination was justified. Some of the Wiki Syntax pages might be re-created later by a bot (at least, I assume that the project manager is using a bot there), but only if they are needed, and I don't think there's any harm in deleting the existing pages. Some of the higher-numbered ones almost certainly won't be needed again, because the first-ever run of the system probably picked up a much higher number of mistakes than subsequent runs will. I was mostly just looking at a list of empty and uncategorized pages and trying to reduce clutter, so, I dunno; I'll have to defer to the judgement of others as to the accuracy of my nominations. -- Beland 05:59, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I am the project leader of the Typo/capitalization project, and I certainly approve deletion of those. I don't think there is a VFD project leader, so I'm not sure what to do there. If there's any doubt that they are not spurious pages, leave them alone. There are about 6000 VFD subpages that need to be dealt with en masse, anyway, so they can just be lumped in with those as soon as I figure out what the community wants done with them, if anything. I will ask the Wiki Syntax project lead about his subpages. -- Beland 06:03, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- And I quote:
- Hi Beland, Please feel free to delete those listing pages added by the Wiki Syntax project. They're easy to recreate if needed. They're all created via text copy-and-pasting the output of a script, I'm afraid, rather than a bot :-(. Only thing is I'd probably suggest keeping a handful of those pages - namely square-brackets 001 through to 007 inclusive, and triple-quotes-001 and 002 - because those page ranges are quite likely to get reused in future runs (those categories appear to have stabilized at those levels), so there's not much to be gained by deleting them; but deleting all the other stuff listed as speedy deletion sounds good as they're unlikely to be reused. I don't feel strongly about this though, so if you'd prefer to delete the lot, then that's fine too. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 08:12, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- ...though it looks like the category has already been cleared out. -- Beland 21:05, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- And I quote:
AMA Meeting Proposal
Congressional bio images
Corey, just to let you know that two of the websites I took the PA 103 images from seem to have disappeared, which is odd as they've been up for years and have both disappeared at the same time (yet were not connected to each other). They used to be here and [here. I'm therefore going through the images and re-labelling them fair use and will look for alternative sources for them, and may apply for permission where appropriate instead of relying on fair use. The ones that came from the U.S. govt I'm retaining as PD; likewise with the one or two (can't remember which) that I know the British government released. Hope this is okay. Best, SlimVirgin (talk) 22:19, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
Hi Corey - just wanted to tell you that I've reverted the image you added to Writer-stub. Images put a lot of strain on the servers, so they were taken off a lot of the heavy-use templates about a month ago (see  for details). Grutness|hello? 05:46, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi Burgundavia: I cannot fathom why you have not follwed the correct Wikipedia procedures, see Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#Phase I: New listings, which clearly states, inter alia: "...First, always contact the user who uploaded the image on their talk page and ask them to supply more information (even if the image says it's being used under a non-free license, maybe it is available under a free license as well). If there are a large number of problem images by the same uploader, consider waiting for a response before listing any of them..." which you have failed to do as you go about questioning images that I have used on Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#Phase 1 - April 22nd. I have tried to respond to some of your questions over there, but so far, yet again without so much as a tiny communication from you on my talk page that you were doing this, why? As an admin you should well know the rules of advising users about intended actions concerning work they have previously submitted! Kindly let me know what it is that you are up to, what you would like to explain to me, and why and how I can be of assistance in resolving this matter. Thank you. IZAK 07:44, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hey, Burgundavia. I usually reply where the comment was made, so in case you do things differently, this is to let you know you've got two replies waiting on my talk page. Cheers →Vik Reykja 17:31, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I was part of that discussion; indeed I was the one who recommended that category's deletion when it was made into a catch-all metro New York category. I also said in the discussion that I thought this sort of category would be a better alternative, which noone objected to. This category isn't just for airports and does not supercede Category:Airports of New York in any way. Please withdraw the CfD for now pending some discussion, which I think should come first. Thanks.--Pharos 00:21, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
New York City is a real and significant entity, it's not an abstract statistical concept; it has eight million citizens, a 51-member city council, a billionaire mayor, even an income tax. Of course some people traveling to NYC land at Newark, but I think it is a significant fact that some transportation facilities are in the city and some are not; if there can be a Category:Transportation in New York City, then Category:Aviation in New York City should be allowed to be a proper subcategory of it.--Pharos 01:08, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
What's wrong with a Category:New York City area airports or the like? Just because Newark is across the Hudson River doesn't make it less important than the other two, and it may even be closer to midtown than LaGuardia by time if you take NJ Transit. --SPUI (talk) 01:25, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- If SPUI's still watching this (I don't want to spread it over too many pages), please see Category talk:Airports of New York City; there was some opinion to put regional airports on a list, but I think that aviation topics in New York City (including non-airport topics) still belong under the Transportation in New York City hierarchy.--Pharos 01:40, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Please consider changing the basis for your vote on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Pandeism from "made-up" to "non-notable." I believe I have adduced sufficient referential evidence to show that this article was not "original research," but simply an exposition on a philosophy which, although real, lacks enough adherents/proponents to be notable enough for inclusion. I apologize for having overestimated the importance of this topic. It was, after all, one of my first posts, when I was new to Wikipedia and not yet familiar with the criteria for notability. -- 8^D BD2412gab 04:37, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
- On second though, since its very easy for those not acquainted with religous details to confuse "theism" with "deism" - as demonstrated by the fact that most of the non-wiki-mirror references on the web do use pandeism to mean pantheism - a redirect would be useful. -- 8^D BD2412gab 06:41, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
- Forget the above. I have found conclusive evidence of the use of the term "Pandeism" dating back to 1833 , being used by Godfrey Higgins, a follower of John Toland, the creator of pantheism.. The term is used in a book written by Higgins called the Anacalypsis. -- 8^D BD2412gab 10:25, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
Hi. You commented on the move of the cricket portal to cricket. Having moved the whole affair back, I have made my own proposal. Could you come and comment, so that we can get consensus for the best version. Cheers, Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 19:57, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Brazilian Olympic Images
Hi. Thanks for your message. Well, the images are free. Just now, I returned to the website, which is still online, and in the multimidia section, image galleries subsection, where all the images are posted (still), the website has a header instructing the press to "click in [such and such place] to get the high resolution version of the images. Thus, the website was offering the images to the press without any restriction, which means that those were released and would be free to be published indiscriminately anywhere — including Wikipedia, I gather. Here's the section I mentioned, but it's in Portuguese (look for the header that reads "ATENÇÃO IMPRENSA", which means "attention press members", right underneath it, there's the sentence that instructs them on where to click to get the high resolution images). Regards, Redux 19:05, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
- I could not find an e-mail address for the Webmaster (only the typical "give us your opinion" stuff). But I did find something that might solve this mistery: turns out that the images were released by the website as long as they are used for the sole purpose of covering the participation of Brazilian athletes, meaning that they did restrict use for commercial purposes. Since Wikipedia is a non-profit organization and the articles in which the images are in use do cover the Brazilian performance in the games, it would appear that we are covered by their terms. We might have to tag the images making the commercial restrictions known though.
Here's the text of the "commitment term" that the press members have to "sign" (really it's just checking a box in one of those electronic forms) before having access to the high resolution versions of the images (I didn't translate it, they had a version in English on the website):
"Upon accepting this commitment term, I agree to use the images available in this website for the sole purpose of the press coverage of brazilian athletes in sports-related events, and I understand that any other forms of use will constitute an infringement of international copyright laws."
I must note that, even though they were offering an English version of the "commitment term", it was a somewhat poor translation of the actual stuff in Portuguese. The English version says "press coverage", but the original version states "editorial coverage", which I believe allows use of the images in any means of divulgement, as long as it's not directly commercial (as in using the image in a company logo, for instance), according to their terms. Do you think that we are covered? Regards, Redux 21:16, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
I disagree with merging demo with Demonstration (disambiguation). None of the topics are ever referred to as demonstrations, just demos. Also, regarding Demo (computer programming), the programmers in the demoscene are known as "coders". I am respectfully reverting these edits, drop me a line to discuss —TeknicTalk/Mail 09:46, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi Burgandavia, Loads more airline stubs and articles to come - there is a lot missing. The airport stuff is great (although the proliferation of airport lists is a bit confusing to say the least). I will make sure that airport names are correct in my airline additions (ie match airports lists). Thanks for the word.Ardfern 22:03, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
I'm fairly certain that "meter" is the only approved English spelling for the SI unit of measure -- at least, I've been taken to task by engineers and scientists for spelling it "metre". I note that the Wikipedia article doesn't agree with me, though, so I don't mind leaving it for now until I have a chance to dig up an authoritative source. David 00:00, 2005 May 4 (UTC)
- Through my 6 years of physics in Canada, where we write everything -re that we can, ive enver seen it written metre, however, I have see kilometre a few times, but i would not call the source a credible one. Good luck on your search, id be interested in your findings. Curran919 00:06, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
- SI is officially maintained by the BIPM. See their website at http://www1.bipm.org/en/si/
- In official BIPM texts, the spelling 'metre' is used. However, there no is prohibition against other spellings. It is just the symbolic forms that are constrained. For example, Italians write speed as chilometri a l'ora, which could be abbreviated as cao or calo but you will see the symbolic form as km/h in Italy. English speakers are just lucky that there is a match between the words and the symbols. Think of it just like we write 'Hg' as the symbolic form for 'mercury'. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_system_of_units#Spelling_variations 220.127.116.11 20:40, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
I noticed you cleared the copyright violation for this article (on Apr. 22).
When you do work on a copyvio can you please update its listing on Wikipedia:Copyright problems?
If you resolve a copyright violation you need to remove the listing on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Remember, listings must stay in place for at least seven days.
I went to clear this listing today (May 4th) only to find that there was no copyvio tag and there were still copyright violations in the text. After deleting, I see that you deleted some versions on April 22, including the copyvio tagged version.
I've reverted the article to the most recent version I could find that doesn't contain any copyright violations and deleted from history all other versions.--Duk 19:13, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports/naming conventions
Please note that the rules of voting for Collaboration of the Week candidates have changed. It is now allowed to vote for only three users on the list. I am not removing the votes you already gave, but any further votes will be removed if the rules are not followed. Any further discussion should take place on the Talk page of the project. Thanks. --Eleassar777 07:32, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Were those links to commercial? I thought since they were links it would be okay? I was just trying to give as much information as I could find. WikiDon
- Well, I know for me, many Wikipedia articles leave me wanting more, I want more info, to learn more. Why do people even bother creating articles like Eclipse_Aviation? They only give you a taste without getting to have a good drink of knowledge. WikiDon
- I don't even like making a new link unless I can back it up right away with substance. It's like the waiter bringing you a plate with parsley, and no meat and potato's. WikiDon
The image page for Image:300px-Montacute.jpg states that the image is a photograph taken by the uploader Giano, who releases it to the public domain, so I do not understand why you listed its copyright status as unverified. The work that you are doing on this image project is great, however. This is a nitpick. --Theo (Talk) 17:25, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation. I mistakenly understood the ==File History== section of the page to show the edit history of the page. Weird that it does not, but a useful lesson to learn. --Theo (Talk) 20:20, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
Dear Burgundavia: Hello! Thanks for your message in my user page. I love the fact you promote yourself as an airline hehe and I love the fact you are committed to aviation. I am mostly committed to aviation and boxing, but I like to stray off and write about people, or things, that have made an important contribution (or at least an infamous contribution) to society.
If I had been born a billionaire, I would have stayed in Puerto Rico and made a real airline. Like Mexicana, Cubana, Dominicana and Ecuatoriana, mine would have been named Puertorriquena de Aviacion. I imagine a fleet of DC-9's (now called MD-80, whatever!), Boeing 727s and a couple of A340s and a Boeing 747 just to say we had them..lol. Dreaming is free!!!
About the Ecuatoriana and Raphael Hernadez photos, I believe they are only free for the site because at the time I asked for permission I had no idea that the site was making a DVD and I did not inform the owners. There are several other pictures like that on the wikipedia, particularly the ones I obtained permission for. I usually search on Airliners.net. There, they have every photo you can be on the lookout for you should see by yourself.
Thanks for the message and God bless you!
Sincerely yours, Antonio Puertorriquena's President Martin
Ehem well they are over 50 photos. All I promise is I will try to contact them all. But, on the other hand the photos make the article prettier so that would be sad if they had to go. And, like I said, just for everyone to know, Rapahel Hernandez Aorport is not Rapahel, but Rafael, named after the famous Aguadilla composer Rafael Hernandez. Thanks a bunch and God bless you burgundavia!
Sincerely yours Antonio Reckless Flight Martin