Contents

User talk:Latorilla

Hi Latorilla, don't take my adding your article to VfD personally - it's just that generally, articles written by people about themselves are viewed as vanity pages, and there is a general consensus that people must be notable to some extent before meriting their own article - not every contributor to every Open Source project should get their own article, or Wikipedia would quickly fill up with lots of articles that are of interest only to the people who wrote them. I've had a look at your contributions to Maitum and T'boli, and they lok pretty good - hope we keep you as a editor here :p -- Ferkelparade 12:27, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I moved the page to User:Latorilla, where it belongs. We should probably leave it on WP:VFD until the end of the period (I think). David Remahl 12:35, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Dont wait for the end of the period. Please delete it now I'll vote for instant deletion. Latorilla 12:37, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hello Latorilla, I'm afraid your article is a copyright violation. I think it's an interesting read, but you can not copy text directly from another source. Please feel free to rewrite the article, see Philippine Tarsier for instrcution. Best regards. -- Solitude 11:08, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

About those copyright violations. I've found more of your articles that contain them, please rewrite content you find on the internet. I also noticed you uploaded several images that seem to be copyrighted. I did notice you thanking someone for the image, did he give explicit permission to use the images for wikipedia under the GNU Free Documentation License? If so, please note this in the images descriptions using: {{GFDL}}. Thanks. -- Solitude 11:24, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

In reply to User_talk:Solitude. When you submit material to the wikipedia, it needs to be copyright free, wether you are in the process of editing or not. You can use the 'show preview' button, or write the article in a text editor on your local pc first. If you really want to upload the article before finishing it, please use the {{inuse}} tage to explicitly let us know that you are working on it right then. The copyrighted URL's were indeed broken, my bad, but I assume you know where you took the content from. Regards. -- Solitude 11:27, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

By the way, you can find the original content back in the history of the copyrighted pages, if you want to rewrite the article, follow the instructions in the copyright boiler plate text. -- Solitude 11:33, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Note that the article content is still available in the page history, for one week. However, it will be extremely difficult to remove the "taint" of the original article from the text without doing a full rewrite. Unfortunately. -- David Remahl 11:33, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I can understand all your emotions here. But I also sense the tendency to knee-jerk reactions. As far as I understand, a wiki was developed for constant editing. So why explode after just few minutes of suspecting. Latorilla 11:39, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• I can sadly sense of certain air of paranoia here. Please show me that it is not true Latorilla 11:42, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Copyright paranoia is bad, however when an article is an obvious copyright breach, then it poses a great threat to the Wiki. Legally, Wikipedia is liable for the content on the web site, although some protection is granted for online bulletin boards. However, that protection is only granted if reactions to copyright violations is immediate. Even if you are editing the page and make it free of copyright-infringing material, the original article will persist in the page history. Because of this, it is very important that the page is deleted and recreated. -- David Remahl 11:46, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Well, then there's a simple solution to that. Delete the history with the supposed "dangerous" material. I am amazed by the level of emotions, really :-) or :( It could be good or bad, not yet sure at this moment though. But ok, I will try my best to clean up the articles. I have emotional relationships to them because I grew up in those municipalities and feel obliged to prevent their stories being reduced to oblivion. Latorilla 12:01, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • We're really not that emotional about it. Solitude acted efficiently in accordance with policy. It is great that you are adding information about the area where you grew up, and I must say the copyvio was wikified very well! — David Remahl 12:17, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Not paranoia Latorilla, it is very easy to spot the copyright violations using Special:Newpages. The sooner copyright violations are found, the sooner they can be removed or rewritten. Don't underestimate the amount of rewriting needed for articles that use a large copyrighted text. -- Solitude 12:01, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Thanks for the action. But IMO, the posting was premature. You could have contacted me first and discussed it with me. I am not a crook that must be reported right away to the proper authorities. Anyway, I have not understimated anything. If you still like to check the article of Maitum, please do it. I am now going to rewrite the article about the tarsiers. Contrary to your probable suspicion that I cannot write my own articles, I will notify you once the tarsiers article is finished. Plagiarism is one thing, but taking information from one source and using it in another article is not considered plagiarism. As to the images, I will temporarily blank them out until I have sent to wikipedia a solid evidence of copyright permissions because you might "raise" the bars and demand such things. If you like, send me a real email address and I will send you the permissions privately. Your action was honorable and wikipedia needs people like you to maintain high quality. But the fast reaction has almost backfired. Everything around us is a compromise. Latorilla 13:37, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

ALso note that you cannot take images from other sources without permission (and even then it may be discouraged, since all Wikipedia content should be GFDL, ideally). For example Image:04tarsier.jpg. Please list all images of which you do not own copyright. David Remahl 11:21, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This issue has been cleared now. I got the permissions to publish the images. The permissions were given to me personally by the original copyright holders Jun Ramos <junram@gsc.weblinq.com> and Gene Boyd Lumawag. Latorilla 09:10, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've edited this article to bring it in line with other bird articles - please see my comments on the talk page. The English and scientific names don't correspond to the list at hornbill, but I'm not sure which is correct. thanks jimfbleak 06:11, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, I obviously wrote that bit in a hurry. As I understand it, the various (former) subspecies are now mostly considered to be full species by HBW. I hope my latest revision makes more sense jimfbleak 05:27, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I was going through and fixing links to corn which is a disambiguation page. For a number of articles including your articles on Sarangani, I didn't know for certain if corn (maize) or corn (wheat, barley, oats) was meant. Could you tell me or change them yourself. I usually use [[maize|corn]] where the original author wrote corn but meant specifically maize. Rmhermen 18:48, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

Not sure wether this comment belongs here - feel free to delete or move it if it doesn't.

I saw your article on the tarsier, and read the discussion about it. All I want to say: thanks for making those beautiful pictures available to the users! --Djadek 15:06, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi Latorilla. I've done something that is certainly going to annoy you: I have listed Care2x for deletion. In the present form, the page does not explain in what respect Care2x differs from many other (commerically) available HISes, apart from the fact that it happens to be open source. I'm leaving this message because it is only fair that I warn you about its listing. JFW | T@lk 20:52, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:Devteam.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 05:40, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Kumusta ka?Are you filipino? Baka gusto mong tumambay? Maybe you'd like to hang out?--Jondel 02:38, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Tboli3.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:41, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Maitum coast.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:52, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image is old, so pre-dates the current standards for uploaded media. Did you ever subsequently place the permission you got into the OTRS permissions queue, as would be done per Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission?

If not, and you still have the emails concerned, I would strongly urge you to do so. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Aceros waldeni nest noahjackson02.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Maitum pot.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]