Just a note -- we have legal requirements that must be met when images are uploaded to the wiki. The image you just uploaded, Akagi.png, needs a few things, most specifically the license under which we may use it. Please see our page All The Tropes:Uploading and Adding an Image to a Page for the specifics. If you can't provide at the very least the license, we're going to have to delete the image to product the wiki from legal liability.
Topic on User talk:SmileyB
What if I edit it? I've got a design background along with visual are and the entire Adobe creative Suite. I don't mean just changing some colors but changing composition background and presentation while the image of Akagi is the same.
I'm more familiar with the requirements for text as I'm a published author and that's my stock in trade; I know less about what constitutes sufficient change to qualify as a derivative work. I think that might do. But it sounds like a whole lot of unnecessary work to go through just to avoid putting "{{fairuse}}" and a couple URLs on the page. And even if you do go that route, we're still going to want to know where off the wiki the altered image is stored so we can recover it in case of another catastrophic event like the orain hack.
Well, i can do that. Where should I put them? under the picture and file line? It said something about the picture information page. Is that a separate page for just the picture?
If you click the "edit" link at the top of the image's page as though it were an article, you will be given an edit box where you can type in everything you need to; when you save it, it will be displayed on the same page as the image.
EDIT: But I see Robkelk has already done it for you.
Please (re-)read All The Tropes:Uploading and Adding an Image to a Page. You are still uploading images without the single most important piece of information we need.
For the Akagi image, here's a link to the terms of use page for the source site. i got the image from them and it wasn't an image I uploaded their. If there is anything hinky, it's on them.
https://www.anime-planet.com/termsofuse
also original link if you want to check.
The Akagi image is okay. I was referring to File:2392383-luther strode tpb cover color by tradd d4mjjpf.jpg and File:Washizu.jpg. Both were lacking licensing information and, less importantly, categorization. Let me make this clear if you haven't actually read "Uploading and Adding an Image to a page". On that page, under "LIcensing", it says, very specifically:
 |
repeatedly uploading files without choosing Licensing for them will get you tempbanned. |
 |
The grounds for such a tempban are laid out in our policy page All The Tropes:How We Do Bans Around Here, which I should have directed you to earlier, as it outlines what you can't be banned for, and the steps we have to take in order to impose a ban.
Following those guidelines, I am required to tell you now that this is a formal warning. Continuing to upload files without providing the required licensing information will result in a tempban. You were instructed on what to do after the first file you uploaded. You have since uploaded two more files without the required licensing information. Strictly speaking, by "How We Do Bans Around Here", this is already grounds for a tempban. Under "Grounds for a warning on the first occurrence and a tempban on a repeated occurrence", the subpoint
- Refusing to learn from honest mistakes, or repeatedly making the same honest mistake after it's been pointed out.
qualifies you for a ban now. But I'm choosing not to impose that ban at this time. If, however, you upload another file without the mandatory licensing information, you will receive a two-week tempban.
Please acknowledge in words in this thread that you understand what is being requested of you and that you intend to comply.
-- Looney Toons, admin
CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7
Did you check the link because the Washizu picture came from the link above. I also provided the link from the rules page o the site it is from. i honestly don't know what else you need from me. I read the rules and the license thing was stated to be optional because of how difficult it is to find. So I gave the link to the usage rules of the site I got the washizu image from. Best most people can do for a lot of images is give the link where they found them. I couldn't find any license thing for the Washizu image so i provided the link to the page with licenses and usage for anime-planet.
Siting the rules here.
Finally (and most importantly, according to our lawyers), the licensing/copyright information for the site where you got the image. This one is "optional" (sort of; you're going to need the licensing information later), not because we're willing to take the fall for you if legal issues raise their hoary heads, but because some sites make it all but impossible to actually find this information. If you can't find it, don't sweat it. But please make the effort. If you're copying the image from Wikipedia, Wikimedia, or DeviantArt, the license information is usually right on the image page, and you can easily copy it.
So the best I could do is give you the link to the page with the usage rules of the other site. I took the image from their sight. In their rules anyone uploading must have already been verified. If there was anything wrong with the image, legally, it would be on Anime planet where I originally got it from.
Pointing to the site is not enough. Our guidelines very clearly point out that you must select one of the licensing options on the upload page. Waving vaguely toward the web and saying "go look at the place I got it" is not selecting a license. Our guidelines also state that if you cannot find an explicit license, "fair use" is always safe. If you cannot be bothered to take the minimal effort required to tag your future uploads with "fair use", we will delete the images to protect the wiki from legal liability, and you will be tempbanned -- starting with two weeks and with increasing duration for each subsequent incident.
This is not negotiable, and trying to play Rules Lawyer will not somehow magically grant you special privileges extended to no other user. You will comply with wiki rules on this front, or you won't be allowed the opportunity to comply with any wiki rules going forward.
-- Looney Toons, admin
CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7
I support @Looney Toons here. This is not a guideline that we think is a good idea to follow, or a policy that we really want people to follow - this is required by law in order for us to keep our "reference work" status, and we must follow it.
-- robkelk, admin
I have made a video on how to choose a license. I have also added a recorded response. Please watch both. I would appreciate it. Feel free to download the video on how to select a license to use as a how to.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/edvhhekxihfsh31/Choosing_A_Liscense.mp4/file
https://www.mediafire.com/file/2rtki0b446opwe8/Message_to_mods.mp4/file
We don't care if you've made a ninety-minute award-winning documentary distributed on all major streaming services. This is not what we asked of you. We asked you to simply confirm that you understand and will follow wiki rules when it comes to adhering to the requirements imposed on us by law. Continued refusal to acknowledge the actual request and answer it will be considered an explicit refusal to adhere to to those requirements, and evidence of your intent to be a deliberate disruptive element on the wiki. We are being very patient with you, but the wiki moderation staff will not tolerate you playing games for much longer.
-- Looney Toons, admin
CC: @Labster, @Robkelk, @QuestionableSanity, @Derivative, @SelfCloak, @GethN7
If you haven't watched the video than what you just said makes no sense. I am now going to assume you haven't. I explained in the video that I will abide by the rules. I have also explained that up until the message I sent the links in, I literally did not understand what you were asking me. The video explains that I understand and will abide by the rules.
Clearly you didn't watch it and have now made an ass of yourself. The video was meant to make sure that, through the tone of my voice, i was being dead serious and not playing games. You have also supported the assertion I made in the video that it feels to me you are on a hair trigger and either have a habit of constantly assuming bad faith with others or you are a person given to pride and ego. I am trying to be reasonable here. If you had listened to the video, message to mods, you would know that. I am almost 100% sure you didn't and my view of you as someone under stress and quick to jump the gun has lowered to someone who feels put on having to deal with a job they ultimately chose to have, callous with no care for others and only makes nice when they are provably called on by others and confronted with their bad behavior.
My question is, why are we exchanging videos on license choosing when the guidelines are very clearly stated right on the page where files are uploaded, pointing to a simple drop-down menu where you can pick what applies? Just because other sites aren't as diligent about copyright doesn't mean we have carte blanche to do the same - a look at the administrivia and other About pages indicate that ATT takes copyright fairly seriously, especially in comparison.
I get being defensive at the impression of being accused of wrong-doing, and the admins have jumped the gun in at least one previous case, but I don't think they're really asking very much of you in this scenario.
|
a look at the administrivia and other About pages indicate that ATT takes copyright fairly seriously, especially in comparison. |
|
That tends to happen on sites where at least half of the bureaucrats are published writers. Copyright is a tool of our trade.
Exactly, thus it stands to reason.
@SmileyB, I have not seen your videos, and I have no intention of doing so. I have no intention of opening a hole in my computer's anti-virus setup in order to accommodate the wishes of a single person.
We have seen many, many people who thought that this wiki's rules did not apply to them. Some of these people have made the effort to understand why our rules exist and why they are worded the way that they are. Others have not, and have gone through tempbans and in some cases permanent bans.
It is up to you to show, by your actions, which group you are going to be in.
That said...
|
Clearly you didn't watch it and have now made an ass of yourself. |
|
You are free to disagree with the moderators. You are not free to insult anyone who edits pages here, including but not limited to a moderator - doing so shows that you are (to use your own words) "callous with no care for others".
I must now ask you to read all four of the pages that make up The Troper's Code, and then reply here, in text, telling us that you have done so.
-- robkelk, admin
@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak
OK. My video was a serious response and plea to each and everyone of you. It was sincere and a clarification of what happened. I have not once said not expected to be exempt from the rules. The video was to convey my sincerity and desire to inform you that. 1) I had no freaking clue what anyone meant by the licensing. 2) Looneytoons is often combative and hostile at the drop of a hat. 3) I had found out how to use the licensing feature and will use it in the future.
You have all made assumptions about the video without watching. I am more than a little irratated that my well meaning and sincere attempt to reach out wasn't even regarded. I have read everything. My only wish is to support this site and work in good faith.....
None of you seemed to get that!!!!!!!!!!!!
The video was a message in my own voice trying to reach you and to tell you that I understand......And you have all spat in my face!!!!!!
YOU SPAT IN MY FACE!!!!!
I am not only angry now. I am disgusted with your attitudes and behavior. I don't know how old any of you are. I don't know what you have been through. I on the other hand can take a lot. Have taken a lot. In a country not my own, with no support, no friends, no help and very little money, I managed to find a job in a month after being screwed by the company hiring me the day before I am meant to move. I am haunted by the fact that I may have walked by my grandfather dying on the bathroom floor when i visited his house and he had a stroke. I looked everywhere and left without checking the bathroom. My sister wrecked my car when she was 13! I. Have. Seen. And. Been. Through. A. Lot. But now, what I find trouble tolerating, is intolerance. I find that I have a short line for callousness and impatience.
Watch the video. I dare you. I DARE YOU, YOU COWARDS.
I had the guts to use my own voice. To take the time and effort to communicate calmly because I thought you were all worth that much.
If you don't watch the video, clearly you are not worth much of anything.
See, now you're just being needlessly (not to mention disproportionately) hostile. My point is that a video response was not at all necessary - just a simple typed statement of "Hey, I was not sure what you guys meant by licensing, but I realize it now and I will be sure to make use of it in the future." For my part, I didn't say anything in any direction about the contents of the video itself - i.e. yes, I did not watch it, because as indicated I was not convinced it was wholly necessary to begin with, and I am inclined to think the same of this life story you so unceremoniously dropped in our laps.
What seemed to be a simple misunderstanding at the beginning is now very much turning into a "my way or the highway" scenario, and you do not want to go that route here. We're all using our own voices to communicate as calmly and civilly as we can, and frankly - speaking as civilly as I can - it's rather sanctimonious of you to assume otherwise on the basis of whether or not one watches a single video, much less predicate your impression of our """worth""" on it.
If you are intent on maintaining this holier-than-thou attitude over a simple matter of template application, that is your right - as it is my right, for example, to completely disregard any impulse to try and help you out in the future, and as it is the wiki bureaucrats' right to decide that this may be crossing a significant line and responding accordingly.
If you made something a gesture of good faith and well meaning. And it was disregarded. Something you did out of respect. something you thought would try to make things clear. and then were told "we aren't watching it. You are being hostile"....tell me...honestly....how..would..you..feel?
@SmileyB We frankly don't have time for this nonsense. We asked you follow a simple policy, and you give us this drama.
Are you going to follow our policy, or do you need to be told to go elsewhere?
If it was me in this situation (and I have been in somewhat similar situations, due to not knowing my way around copyright too well), I would simply have taken my time with the response - and, if necessary, asked for further clarification - and/or signaled my understanding of what I was being told in a prompt and timely manner as I can manage. In fact, if I was uncertain of how to handle a given image or work's copyright when uploading, I would actually ask a relevant admin ahead of time - as you can see in one such instance here. If I felt the need to make an entire video's worth of a response, it would not be for something as simple as a casual inquiry.
I'm sorry for whatever it is that happened to you and made you this way, as I am sure you did not "deserve" it, but to put it quite bluntly, I am built different - and in a way that means I do not take kindly to abuses of goodwill, be it mine or someone else's. And in the process of this, you've managed to do both.
@SmileyB, respect is a two-way street. And you have consistently disrespected everyone else taking part in this thread by refusing to follow the rules that have been pointed out to you, to the point where one of the other moderators asked that I step in.
I asked you to read the Troper's Code.
Instead of doing that, you chose to reply with invective, name-calling, and insults.
You are now in violation of Article 1 of this wiki's Terms of Service, in addition to having already been in violation of article 2 of this wiki's Terms of Service. That is grounds for a tempban without warning on the first occurrence.
As per Article 5 of this wiki's Terms of Service, you are now temporarily banned from editing this wiki for two weeks, including editing this page. You are free to appeal this decision to any other moderator.
@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak
SmileyB... you're being fairly childish. Is this really the hill you want to die on? This is a really low bar the admins are asking for here, asking you to read some pages and acknowledge that you will follow the policy.
> My sister wrecked my car when she was 13!
Cool story bro. This is kind of the equivalent getting a ticket to fix a broken tail light, then going to the judge and telling a sob story about how they're refusing to let you drive your car and the police wouldn't even look at your car mechanics videos on youtube. But seriously, have you fixed that tail light? You're still not getting a license for that car without a tail light being certified fixed by an official.