The redirect/official-name thing has been under discussion on VT's Talk page since shortly after the shootings unleashed chaos upon Wikipedia's VT-related pages. It looks like someone decided to be overly-bold and make an end-run around the consensus issue. Feel free to say your piece on the Talk page, and thanks for helping hold the line until consensus is reached. --Dynaflow 01:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, one more thing. Make sure not to run afoul of WP:3RR. I did accidentally when I was helping fight off the orgy of vandalism a couple of days ago on the VT-related pages, and I had to write an apologia the size of a small legal brief to argue for my editing privileges back. --Dynaflow 01:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for helping keep the page where it belongs. I think it would be better, though to keep the "main article" template in place. The big reason it's there in a jump-out-at-you kind of way is to show editors who are just itching to make some sort of contribution to the VT massacre issue that there's a whole article on the massacre, and they don't need to make it any more prominent on VT's main page than it already is. It's a temporary solution, of course. Once emotions simmer down, I'd like to take the massacre down to one sentence, with an in-sentence link to the massacre article, à la École Polytechnique de Montréal. --Dynaflow 03:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Technion, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Pansy Division 2003 Promo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Technion. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 04:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A non-free image was recently removed from one or more of your userboxes. Please be advised that Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Wikipedia policy does not allow templates (which includes userboxes) or user pages to contain any copyrighted content not under free license; so, for example, "fair use" images are explicitly forbidden. This clause is to be interpreted strictly and without exception, for legal reasons. You can research Wikipedia's fair use policy guidelines for more details.

I hope this does not discourage you from creating more userboxes, your contributions to Wikipedia are greatly appreciated. For images and other media that are freely available for use in userpages and userboxes, check out Wikimedia Commons. Thank you. ShadowHalo 09:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mac OS X Tiger.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!
I made this flag of the US and it is a humouristic version of the flag, and i need help with straightening up the stars so it will look better.
If u'll agree your help will be very much appreciated. Oren neu dag (talk) 15:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the iamges in Spatial_anti-aliasing, you'll probably notice that the image you reverted my change to (File:Antialiased-lanczos.png) looks a lot darker than the other two in the upper area where the pixel value is 50% gray (808080). That's because values in image files are assumed to be compressed with a gamma of about 0.45, so they get expanded by a power 2.2 when reproduced as display brightness. 0.5^2.2 is about 0.22, not a bad "mid gray", but far darker than the 50% white/black pattern should be. If it doesn't look too dark on your display, your display is probably way out of calibration, or set for a very low display gamma. My attempt to fix it by distorting the tone scale was somewhat 'arbitrary', but I think produced a result more representative of what would be expected from an accurate anti-aliasing of the scene. Dicklyon (talk) 06:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, I really do not want to get into an argument with you because it’s painfully obvious you have a lot more free time than I have. First of all, it’s disingenuous to say, “you'll probably notice that the image you reverted my change to (File:Antialiased-lanczos.png) looks a lot darker than the other two in the upper area,” because the reason it looks darker is because you yourself went and modified the other image in order to make it look lighter, which I am going to undo in a moment. Second, in the original images, the gray at the top is exactly halfway (#808080); your modifications make it much lighter than that. If you don’t believe me, open them in any image editor and check the pixel values yourself. Third, gamma correction is often already handled by the graphics subsystem in the operating system and even in the display system of graphics cards and even by some monitors, so applying an arbitrary gamma correction to the original file is redundant and in effect overcompensates. Because of all this variability in OSes, graphics cards, and physical displays, it’s best to leave the original image files as is; are you next going to go around Wikipedia and download all audio files, change their EQ so that they sound good on your particular stereo system in your own den, and then reupload them with the same meaningless comment “Adjust tone scale”? Fourth, your attempt to fix it wasn’t “somewhat arbitrary,” it was totally arbitrary, because different displays have different gamma values, and different OSes and graphics subsystems handle gamma correction in different ways. Fifth, by changing the grayscale levels of the image, the resulting images are no longer a faithful representation of the original code written by the contributors who created the original images; the images’ creators’ technical decisions and aesthetic judgments should take precedence over your own personal standards. Finally and most important, it’s highly presumptuous of you to go around Wikipedia arbitrarily modifying other people’s work in order to impose your own personal, arbitrary opinions of how things should be. If it’s that big a deal to you, the least you can do is have the courtesy of saving your own arbitrary modifications under a different filename. —Technion (talk) 09:09, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted them, can you discuss them on the talk page and bring a reliable source as well? Youtube doesn't cut it - especially not on a WP:GA quality article. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:44, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Technion.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add ((bots|deny=DASHBot)) to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 5 July 2011 (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) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]