User talk:Dean randall

Please click here to leave me a new message.

dave thomas

just to tell you that i'll be fair with you if you'll be fair with me!

~~~ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding, {{subst:User:Cowman109/Smile2}} or {{subst:User:Cowman109/Smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Thank you. ➨ JIMOTHY T

Image:LUFFASTUDENT.JPG

Hi Darren. I don't want to be picky or anything, but you are claiming copyright on this image on the basis that you took the photograph yourself. Clearly, it is one of those beginning-of-term, drag-the-pupils-into-the-hall, photograph-them-and-flog-the-results-to-the-parents jobs.

That makes it highly unlikely you took the picture. If you are the subject of the picture, then you can claim copyright on it (although your parents, having paid for it, would likely be the ones owning the copyright). However, if you are not the subject, and since you clearly didn't take the picture yourself, then you have made an incorrect licencing declaration and need to change it immediately.

Wikipedia takes copyright seriously. For more information see our copyrights information page. Thanks. ➨ ЯEDVERS 10:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Darren, if you don't understand copyright, please don't upload pictures. The picture now is illegal to use on Wikipedia as there is no "fair use" justification for using a such a picture. As you clearly don't want to admit who is in the picture and you are thus unable to disclaim copyright on it, it must now be deleted.

Additionally, who are you trying to fool? The phrase "took picture myself" is claiming authorship. It obviously doesn't mean "I took picture myself from somewhere else". What a lot of cow dung!

Since you have lied on this upload, then lied to the admin who questioned you about this upload, let me put you on a formal warning here: The next time you upload an image with an incorrect licence you will be blocked from editing. ➨ ЯEDVERS 11:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which now leads me to question Image:Lukeskills.JPG. You have said this was taken at a match and that it is your own work that you are releasing copyright on. The problem here is that this image is of professional quality, taken with an expensive lens and posed by the player in question. It also, on closer inspection, appears to have been scanned in from a printed source. You are only the author of a photograph if you took the photograph yourself (ie, actually clicked the shutter on a camera that was pointing at the subject at the time and the image uploaded was the image you captured at that point). Would you like to come clean? ➨ ЯEDVERS 11:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay then. I'm happy to WP:AGF on this. But please take my above notes on copyright and uploading to heart - Wikipedia really does take copyright seriously and it seems that you don't. ➨ ЯEDVERS 11:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

You have been both warned before and blocked before for making personal attacks. Please withdraw the accusation that I have acted "in retaliation" for anything. ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison

Wikipedia: He made his way straight into the reserve team but it was still a major surprise when he was called up for his first team debut on the last day of that season. On 13th May 1967 he was chosen to play against Everton F.C. at Turf Moor and at the age of 16 years and 220 days he became the second youngest player ever to play for the club and the youngest ever to play in the 1st Division.

Clarets MAD: He went straight into the reserve team but it was still a major surprise when he was called up for his first team debut on the last day of that season. On 13th May 1967 he lined up against Everton at Turf Moor and at the age of 16 years and 220 days became the second youngest player ever to play for the club and the youngest ever to play in the 1st Division.

Wikipedia: He didn’t win a first team place the following year but he was still a vital part of the team that won the FA Youth Cup for the Burnley, playing inside-left with Steve Kindon on the left wing.

Clarets MAD: It didn’t win him a first team place the following year but he was a vital part of the team that won the FA Youth Cup for the Clarets, playing inside-left with Steve Kindon on the left wing.

Wikipedia: However in 1968 and with the departure of willie Morgan he stepped up into the first team and played on a regular basis, enjoying a run of eight successive victories in the Autumn of 1968, which included a 5-1 win over Leeds united.

Clarets MAD: With the departure of Willie Morgan in 1968 he stepped up into the first team on a regular basis and was soon joined by Kindon as we went on a run of eight successive victories in the autumn of 1968.

Wikipedia: There was constant speculation that he and manager, Jimmy Adamson, didn’t see eye to eye and he was forever being linked with moves to bigger clubs, particularly after relegation.

Clarets MAD: There was constant speculation that he and manager Jimmy Adamson didn’t see eye to eye and he was forever being linked with moves to bigger clubs, particularly after we had been relegated.

Obvious copyvio. ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These are not "my standards", these are Wikipedia standards. There is not a "small similarity", there are whole sentences and paragraphs that are the same. Even when they differ, it's general to turn "us" to "their" and the like. You cannot copy word-for-word another copyright document, then tweak words here and there to make it free from copyright. You have to re-write in your own words. I repeat what I said before: stop uploading copyright material to Wikipedia. It's not that hard to grasp as a concept, is it? ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Follow the instructions given on the copyvio article's page. ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:LUFFA.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:LUFFA.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The summary you gave for this image is unacceptible. The photographer holds the copyright for school photographs, not the subject of them, nor the parents who paid £5 for a 5x7. The JPS^{talk to me} 19:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redvers?

Redvers is not blocked. I'm not sure where you got that idea. Syrthiss 19:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oic. Yes, even admins can be blocked. Syrthiss 19:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your pretend NGO

If either you or your little friend recreate it, you'll be permanently blocked. Got that? Thanks! ➨ ЯEDVERS 19:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lukeskills.JPG

Hello. You told Redvers that you used your dad's camera and lens to photograph Image:Lukeskills.JPG. I'd be interested to know which camera and lens were used. Can you remember what the focal length was? The JPS^{talk to me} 19:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your VandalProof Application

Dear Dean randall,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that at this time you do not meet the minimum requirement of 250 edits to mainspace articles (see under main here). Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof.

Prodego ^talk 01:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[[Image:Lukeskills.JPG]]

Possibly unfree Image:Lukeskills.JPG

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Lukeskills.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. HawkerTyphoon 11:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HawkerTyphoon 01:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that it has - however I'm still not convinced, as your dad would have considerable trouble getting a telephoto-lensed camera pitchside during a match without being spotted. The onus is on you to prove that it's not copyrighted. I would be willing to assume good faith, but since your previous edits show that you have a flagrant disregard for copyright, I'm convinced that this picture is not free. HawkerTyphoon 11:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I can't take your word for it. Is there some way you can prove that you took the photo? A photo of the photo, for example? Or even better, a photo of the negative, close up? Although some users will give you the benefit of the doubt, I am considerably more difficult to convince. We need proof that the picture is in fact yours - Does your father have an internet gallery of the photos? The Nikon D50 is a digital camera, I believe, so could you find the original file, one that hasn't been printed out? HawkerTyphoon 13:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you can prove that the photograph is yours, it will be deleted in about 10 days, as per the discussion linked to at it's page. Thankyou. HawkerTyphoon 21:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know, a horrible outrage. It really is. But copyright is copyright, and as it's highly doubtful that the photograph was taken by you, it will be deleted in ten days. If in the meantime you can prove it is yours, contact me, an adminstrator, or the page in question. HawkerTyphoon 21:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can see where Redverse is coming from, but to be quite honest I won't care unless you start making iffy contributions on articles I watch, that's all. Keep your head down, make some anti-vandalism edits by watching Special:Recent Changes, and avoid any article you have an opinion on, especially Bognor Regis or the like. How about making a WP:Requested Articles? Do some research, slap down a stub. it'll be fine. HawkerTyphoon 22:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your message that the file is still on the SD card... this digital file would be much better than the print anyway. Why can't you connect it to the computer using the supplied USB cable and transfer the file? This would cost you zilch. The JPS^{talk to me} 11:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to my user subpage

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. ➨ ЯEDVERS 22:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]