User talk:Quadell

Talk archives
1	(4/8/2004 – 9/14/2004)	1 - 50
2	(9/16/2004 – 10/15/2004)	51 - 100
3	(10/16/2004 – 11/18/2004)	101 - 150
4	(11/18/2004 – 12/8/2004)	151 - 200
5	(12/8/2004 – 12/30/2004)	201 - 250
6	(12/31/2004 – 2/11/2005)	251 - 300
7	(2/11/2005 – 3/5/2005)	301 - 350
8	(3/5/2005 – 3/29/2005)	351 - 400
9	(3/30/2005 – )	401 -

Comoran franc

I was going to write an article on the Comoran franc. In 1994, I worked on the devaluation of the currency. There's one major problem. The correct name for the currency is the Comorian franc. And to be certain, I checked with the Britannica, UN, IMF, World Bank, and the Comorian legation to the UN. In fact, the Comorian legation said that no such word "Comoran" exists. There is a table on the page that lists all the African currencies. It uses the word "Comoran". How do I set this table correct? SDC 22:54, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Impersonator is vandalizing my pages

Sorry, if am flagging you down, but is seems that no admin is currently paying attention. A vandal registered the name ClockworkSouI (talk · contributions) who was impersonating legitimate user ClockworkSoul and has vandalize a number of pages, including my talk page. Last letter, change ell to eye. Could you block this user ASAP? Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:56, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks for blocking that vandal. It seems this person has been attacking for the past 24 hours, impersonating legitimate users such as Academic Challenger, FreplySpang, and Mel Etitis -- replacing an "L" with an "I" in the user name. I would not be surprised if you were the next victim because of the L's in your name. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:28, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Benedictus

With all due respect, Quadell, how can you say that that line was a farce? They showed it all over cnn.com, bbc.co.uk, TIME and you say it's a FARCE?!?!?!?! I have proof that it's real, wait, I'll look it up in vatican.va. Meanwhle, I suggest you look at TIME with the Darth Vader cover. It's somewhre at the beginning. Temporary 15:32, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi Quadell, I've responded here, and I've found the quote on cnn.com as well, so it could perhaps be added in an appropriate place on the article which has been protected. Thanks --Silversmith 16:06, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

ClockworkSouI

Interesting... thanks for blocking the impostor. :) – ClockworkSoul (the real one)

• I just noticed on RC another user: User:CIockworkSouI. This time, the "I" is on the second and last letters. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:41, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi. You've been very helpful to me recently, and I appreciate it. I'm pretty new here. I came across a guy doing a very large number of vandalisms. I listed him on the "Vandlism in Progress" page. Is that the right thing to do? His username is Cantus. Thanks. SDC 02:03, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Copyright notices

With respect to /copyright, According to Cap 528 of Hong Kong law there is no distinction between photograph and other works. I'm not sure if the Republic of China (Taiwan) has a copyright treaty with the United States. And by the way Template:PD-Germany is being nominated to WP:TFD. — Instantnood 23:42, May 10, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for making the change at /copyright, and I have modified {{PD-China}} a little bit accordingly. My German is not that good either. :-D — Instantnood 15:54, May 15, 2005 (UTC)

Image tags

Hi, I've noticed you've commented several users' talk pages recently about not-yet-tagged images they've uploaded. I don't really know much about copyright licensing, so I was hoping that you could take care of their images for me. In the last week or so I've found some uploaded by User:Demonhunter and User:McCann51 that looked like they might be being used without permission. I tried to guide Demonhunter but without a lot of luck, because I wasn't very familiar with policies. I've asked McCann to ask you about the tagging. I'd like to know more about this stuff myself so I can start taking care of it. --Idont Havaname 06:14, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Nutrition Images

I was looking at The license data for the carrot nutrition data which links to a talk page on the details for the licensing.. It appears pretty clear that the owner of the images is adding the restriction that the images "label image in conjunction with Wikipedia's food-related articles, provided that those images link to http://www.nutritiondata.com". This is a fine restriction which we can accept, but it means that the images are *NOT* GFDLed as they are tagged. ... or am I missing something? --Gmaxwell 20:43, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Hello. The GFDL requires that the authors be credited. If the author wants to be credited as "http://www.nutritiondata.com", that's fine with me. (Similarly, if an author on an anonymous message board wants to be called "HotLindy01", then we have to credit HotLindy01 according to the terms of the GFDL, even if that looks unprofessional.) So in my opinion, that requirement falls into the requirements of the GFDL.

As a side note, I seriously doubt the images could be copyrighted at all. They are presenting factual information provided by the FDA, so the only part that could be copyrighted is the layout - but the layout is designed to look as much like the FDA labels as possible (which are not copyrighted), so I'm not sure a claim of "creative content" would hold up. I tagged them {{GFDL}} to give NutritionData the benefit of the doubt. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)}

Sorry, but it's still not GFDL. Nowhere do they state GFDL, in fact they specifically only give permission for use by wikipedia in food related articles. I would not be able to use these images in gmaxwell-pedia even if I attribute them correctly nor could we use them in a non-food related article. Further, the requirement that the attribution be in the form of a hyperlink is not really in-line with the GFDL... Because of all this, I decided to take action. I have produced a python script that generates a SVG of the nutrition label that looks just like the images we are using, from a set of name=value pairs. This SVG can then be rasterized to an image and included in an article..... But now after having done this, I don't think it's a good idea to use it: Since there is no SVG support in wikipedia's mediawiki, we have no way of producing an editable object for use in the article, this is really not very wikipedia like. Further, the image provides no rich metadata that could be used down the road for a more advanced search ( to search wikipedia for fat free foods, for example). As a result I would propose that rather then using the images, I spend some time messing with CSS to produce a nice looking template text box that can contain this information... and we skip the images entirely. What do you think? --Gmaxwell 19:04, 15 May 2005 (UTC)