User talk:Angela: Difference between revisions

Hello,

Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks,APH 10:59, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Angela .. i wanna thank you for your interest in the arabic Projects , actually i want to convert the system of numbers in the Arabic sister Projects : Ar_wikibooks , Ar_wikiquote , Ar_wikisource , Ar_wiktionary from Indian numerals to Arabic Numerals .. can you please lead me to the procedure for making that ...Many thanks--Unfinishedchaos 11:35, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Angela, I am beginning to doubt that new users understand the WP:3RR. A user, after spending a dozen reverts over the last two days as an anon IP, is telling me "I edited the article. My edit is the one being reverted." I've heard this before. It seems that new users think that if they are restoring their edit after it is removed then the 3RR rules don't apply to them. (Even if several users are reverting their edit and even after discussion begins on the talk page.) Do we need to spell out more what this covers?

Oh, and I am now your sockpuppet... :) - Tεxτurε 20:44, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Wikipedia:Revert just needs a clearer explanation. I'm surprised it isn't obvious though. Angela. 00:00, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Dear Angela, I recently got aware that the use of noncommercial-only images is no longer tolerated at the en-wiki. Same for the de-wiki. So the question came up whether Jimbo's statement is of mandatory application to all wikis subject to the rules of the Wikimedia Foundation or whether local wikis may, if not allow then at least continue to tolerate the upload of noncommercial-only images? My concern is that at the lb-wiki, where I am a sysop, the most active image contributors, responsible for more than 50% of our images, publish all their images as noncommercial-only images. The result of an internal discussion was that none of them would ever accept to allow any commercial use of their work. Hence, a strict application of the ban of noncommercial-only images would lead not only to a fatal drop down of image contributions, but would force the lb-wikipedians to delete about 50% of their images. Is it possible to prevent this by adopting a less strict local policy? --Otets 17:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

replied at lb:User talk:Otets. Angela. 19:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer. Since there is no official and general policy related to this subject, I think that we may at short term update already our FAQ on copyright issues in the way Jimbo and you construed the Wikimedia rules, but continue to tolerate images under -NC licenses in case the relevant contributors would refuse to relicense their work under a free license. I will encourage a further discussion within the community, in order to find the least harmful solution. --Otets 20:14, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Noncommercial images are non-free. They are absolutely forbidden in all Wikimedia projects. This has always been the policy and will always be the policy. They should be deleted promptly.--Jimbo Wales 21:31, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]