Knowledge (XXG)

talk:Images/Archive 3 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

177:"Hello: I really do not like how you cropped and edited my photo of Jim Steranko, so I am changing it back. I am a photographer, and I made a serious and thought-out decision how I wanted to best present my image. I took more than 20 of Steranko at the con, and could have had a boring photo like you have cropped my photo down to be. The reason I presented it in this way was to show the con around him. I do not want it presented in this fashion. Or I will take the image down. I have contributed many many images to Knowledge (XXG), and never has anyone just gone in and chopped up an image of mine this way." 1140:. I have spoken several times to Remo on Facebook (probably not the best place, but it was the easiest way to contact him) and he has provided me with some information about him which I have included in the page (with references). The problem I am having is finding an image of him. There are images of him on Facebook but I don't know if there is any copyright on them or if they have been released into the public domain. I also do not know who took the pictures. 38: 1023:
picture is scanned, I use a graphics editor (PSP) to smoothly rotate the image back to the normal alignment, apply appropriate correction settings (contrast, &c.), scale it down to get a nice smooth tone, then crop it appropriately. This eliminates nearly all moiré pattern effects, except perhaps for slight gray intonations on a light background. For the latter I usually try again with slightly different modifications.—
282:
make a decent head shot, and the cropped one is too tight, and looks very awkward. I've also gone in and cropped or enhanced photos of others, but I do try to be respectful; in most cases, it's just amateurs who wouldn't know a good photo from a hole in their head, but in this case it's a photographer who cares, and I'd say respect his art. Just because we can legally change it doesn't mean we should.
1526:
contract law to assert control over patrons' reuse of images. That would be a civil contract between the museum and the patron, which means it wouldn't be binding on Knowledge (XXG) if the patron uploaded here, but you (as a patron) would assume a risk of civil court action if you broke a contract with the museum. You didn't ask about the latter in your previous query, but
955: 1229:, according to the author the photo "must" be attributed to be used ("All usage must display the phrase 'Photo: Philip Gabrielsen' in the immediate vicinity of the image"). I thought I had read somewhere that we shouldn't put "Photo by " directly underneath the image when used in an article. Can somebody help me by clarifying the rules there may be about this? 838:
The Image namespace was moved to File for the convenience of audio and video files, but should not result in the detriment of use of Image files, which in my opinion should still use the Image: format for purposes of clarity, even though the actual file they represent is of the namespace File. As it says,
1301:
have images, but, on the other hand, its draconian enforcement of fair use means that locating an image that actually has anything to do with the topic at hand is virtually impossible. This leads to the ludicrous situation of people slapping images onto articles that have little or nothing to do with
448:
I think the image should be moved to another section (as in not in the infobox) and another image should be used. The current picture has good composition but I think a replacement can be found to better illustrate the subject. So basically, move the picture to another section and find a picture that
345:
Because there isn't a "free/non-free" dichotomy with copyright. What WhatamIdoing is suggesting is that the author could have chosen a copyright license doesn't allow derivatives to be created from it. Such a license is still broadly "free" because it can still be used as you like, except that you
1483:
Let's say I want to add a photo to an article on Joe Bloe, a baseball player from 1919. I visit Cooperstown and there is a display case showing his jersey and the baseball he used to pitch a perfect game, etc. If I take a photo of that display case, is that my property, so I can then upload and use
1545:
So, in other words, let's say I took a photograph of an ancient Egyptian scroll a museum was exhibiting. The scroll itself has no artistic rights attached, but the museum would have rights to the exhibit. The museum has made an investment in the exhibit, whether it's a baseball jersey, or dinosaur
837:
Not. There is nothing on the page about files (files other than images) other than in the sentence, "Knowledge (XXG) contains millions of illustrative images and other electronic media." The page only discusses images and how to use them. Naming it "WP:Files" would be completely counterproductive.
281:
I agree that the original photographer does not have the authority to revoke the license or the image; but I also agree with him that the image as he originally presented it does a better job in the context of the article, showing that guy in a relevant situation. The image is not sharp enough to
1705:
into an article in image form. I have a serious problem with using an image as a source for information... especially a user created image. There are frequently serious OR and reliability issues that crop up when information is drawn by a user from an image. However, these issues go away if you
516:
I am the photographer and I thank you all for your input. I asked that it not be cropped, because this is how I wanted it to be presented. I already stated my reasons for this. For this article to go from C class to B class it will need a photo of the subject, and this is the one I have taken the
1593:
Does anyone know of a way to link to and use images from a foreign language wikipedia, like the Japanese version of wikipedia? I want to use some pictures from that wikipedia, but I couldn't link to it like normal. Is it even possible, or will I have to re-upload it to English wikipedia? Thanks.
182:
I cropped the photo because the article is about Steranko, not the convention, and I think the cropped version shows him better. If I understand copyright law and WP policy correctly, K72 released the photo into the public domain, so he has no authority to determine how it's presented, he has no
1022:
I know this doesn't answer your question, but in terms of scanning antiquarian book images so that they don't show the moiré pattern, what I usually do is position the page so that it is at a slight angle (5–10°) to the scanning instrument, then scan at a higher than normal resolution. Once the
432:
I have also been asked to comment on this cropping, though I'm not sure why. It is legal and acceptable to crop the photo. I think it just has to be handled the same way as any other content dispute is handled... through discussion and consensus-building. The photo is out of focus and grayscale
1525:
The earlier reply is specific to the circumstances described. Most photographs from the 1960s are under copyright, in which case a photo of the photo would be a derivative work (that is, you the rephotographer wouldn't gain an entirely new set of rights to it). Additionally, some museums use
467:
To Asmeurer: I did indeed create a separate image. As for why I asked random people to comment here, well, I needed info on the legality and policy concerning images, and since you were all in this Talk Page's History, I notified you. I do not see what Good Faith has to do with respecting a
962:
Digitized photos scanned from printed sources often have a checkerboard pattern or rows of alternating light and dark spots which I presume to be due to the dot pattern of the scanner coming into and out of register with the dot pattern of the halftone in the printed source.
1108:
Two editors have a dispute at WPMED over whether the other guy is unfairly promoting his private-practice cosmetic surgery business by (*gasp*) listing their websites on the File: pages (not in the articles, but in the "source" field of the description). The discussions
107:
everywhere, as far as I am aware. Is there some reason this is included in this "simplest form" example? I have many times at the help desk/new contributors help page advised users that the "simplest form" (even serendipitously using that exact language independently) is
262:
CC licenses are irrevocable, so I suggest that the photographer consider this one a learning lesson. If you are interested in a reasonable compromise, it sounds like the author has plenty of other shots, and perhaps a different one would make a better head shot.
258:
You are correct. The photographer chose the "by" (attribution-only) license restriction; it's therefore safe to modify (such as by cropping). If the photographer didn't want it modified, then s/he should have chosen a license that included "nd" (no derivatives)
1005:
I am not an expert on Image rendering but you could go to sourceforge.net and download Gimp. Gimp is a freeware version of Photoshop and does most of the same things without the cost. You can also go to youtube and find tutorials that will teach you how to use
1338:
However, it seems that the seemingly apostrophes are thinking that the word "ACUPAT" is being italicized. Help is appreciated since I want to put the image of an armed SAJ operative on illustrate its page since I removed its gallery, which is inappropriate IMO.
311:
image and it's properly annotated as "other version" at Commons. As to which image should be used in the article's infobox, that should be decided by consensus on the article talk page. The original uploader gets one !vote, the same as any other editor.
223:
about the convention. Therefore, I recommend that you make a separate cropped image. I also recommend that you verify that the editor cannot in fact remove the image. Then the issue will just be an arbitration of which image should be included in the
1682:
That is entirely too restrictive. Some information is much better presented as a graph or diagram than in text. Furthermore properly authenticated images can be primary or secondary sources on a par with text sources - maps for instance.
1546:
bones, and would want to protect that investment. If photos of the exhibit became widely available to the public it might devalue the exhibit. But I think you're also saying the museum would sue me, not Knowledge (XXG). Does this sum it up?
112:
and gone on to describe the ability to change the right and size defaults using |left and |???px. So why is this in there? Is this possibly an artifact from a time when images did not automatically default to the right, or am I missing
1568:, then those would affect the patron only (if at all). These matters don't boil down quite as easily as that; one makes one's own decisions of what risks to assume (and for the record, I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice). 1510:
So the museum has no rights to photos you upload? If the material was more recent, like a sports figure from the 1960s, for example. Does subject matter not play a part? Does the museum have no rights to any photographs of their
357:
I am talking about licenses, not copyright. Of course, the original photographer retains the copyright to his work. But what free license will Knowledge (XXG) accept that doesn't allow derivatives? Such a restriction makes it a
306:
image? By definition, as a free image, anyone anywhere can modify the file as they please, as long as the author(s) or licensor(s) is attributed. Nightscream did not overwrite the original image – he created a second,
665:
governing the number of images in articles? My understanding is that the more images in an article, the longer it will take to load on slower connections. Is that accurate? Would someone be so kind as to check out
860:
and there is nothing further that needs to be said. I would recommend keeping all of the examples of the format Image:, so that by implication users would tend to have a preference for using Image instead of File.
214:
that this is released under seems to allow you to crop the photo. I personally think that the cropped version looks much better in his article, but also you should note that the photo is included in the
1732:
is unrestorable? Might be interesting to know if it's because the file is older than ones I've successfully restored. It was created on 8 December 2004 and deleted on 22 November 2005, if that helps.
634: 1147:, or should I try to find out who took the picture and ask them for the copyright details? Or is it safe to upload it without asking? Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. - 670:, there are 6 images in the article but 2 of them essentially duplicate the same thing. I've tried to remove one but one of the article's more prolific contributors objects. Cheers. 468:
photographer's wishes, since consensus may decide that the cropped version is better. I do not think moving it to another section makes sense, since there is no other image available.
987:
It seems to me this should be removable with some mathematical filtering? Is there a way to get this done without buying expensive software or becoming an image processing expert?
195:
that I took and added, and I did not react this way. I want to tell him this, and suggest a consensus discussion, but don't want to inflame the situation. What do you think?
128:
I have made the change to the page reflecting that right it is the default, highlighting that right placement is preferred in most places, and describing how to override.--
1614: 1070:
I have noticed that pywikipediabot has changed some images from File: to Image: and I was wondering if there was something that directed this or if it was just an error.--
183:
authority to "take it down", and to declare that the article MUST present the photo as he declares, simply because he's a photographer, without discussion, sounds like
1445:, doesn't understand some XML element in the Inkscape versions of the files. I am not sure whether this is an Inkscape bug or an RSVG bug. Can an SVG guru help??? 943: 883:
On three separate computers over the last few days I have noticed our images are sluggishly uploading, or not uploading at all in the articles. Is it just me? --
1136:
I am extremely confused over image rights at the moment. I am currently working on an article for the rapper Remo Conscious on a subpage in my user space, found
210:
I am not sure why you asked several seemingly random people to comment on this, but since you asked me to, I will. I too am no expert on copyright law, but the
362:
image which could only be used with a justifiable Fair Use Rationale at en-wiki, i.e., "The license must not prevent commercial reuse or derivative works", re
517:
time to create for the article. This article is well-written and researched; my contribution will be this photo. That is really all I have to say on this. --
703:
According to fair use criteria, images must be more than decorative and serve an actual useful purpose in the article. I propose extending this to include
1621:
accepts freely-licensed images (no fair use!!!). If you want to move an image from Knowledge (XXG) to Commons, so it can be used more widely, please read
1613:. When an image is available on Wikimedia Commons, that same filename is accessible from any Wikimedia Project. For example, here's a file on Commons: 1302:
the topic being discussed, purely because they are images. Either relax the fair use policy or stop insisting that every high level article have images.
1564:
assert rights, which might or might not be valid depending upon the sort of rights asserted or the jurisdiction. If the type of rights asserted are
1484:
it in an article, or is property of the museum? I know this question has probably been asked before, but I didn't know where to look for the answer.
1728:
I have a question for an admin, or maybe just someone familiar with the history of how images worked on Knowledge (XXG). Any idea why the image on
1499:
1919 falls under the pre-1923 public domain window of US copyright law. So if what you say is correct there would be no competing copyright claim.
638: 923: 823:
Good idea, but we'd have to copy-edit a lot of the WP pages that discuss images. The file/image thing is already confusing me beyond belief! :)--
725:
It would be preferable to have the discussion in one place or the other, but not both. This talk page is the better place, rather than the main
547:
Agree with several above - consensus is clear that a modified image may be used regardless of contributor's wishes - whether a particular image
228:
article, which I think shouldn't be too hard to reach a consensus in your direction for, considering how much better the cropped image looks.
1114: 1110: 905:
I want to use a non-free entity logo on an article, but can't figure out how to lower the resolution. Can somebody help me out? The image is
862: 1309: 577: 1383: 1275: 83: 71: 66: 1328: 1250:
While you can doubtless find a couple of similar attributions somewhere on Knowledge (XXG), we generally avoid using such images.
734: 686: 707:
images—not just copyrighted material. (Exceptions would include icons and so forth which exist to make site navigation easier.)
442: 204: 906: 1448:
UPDATE: It could be an Adobe Illustrator bug, since that's what Squidonius originally created his SVG images with. Any ideas?
242: 1635: 1465: 1415: 1137: 433:(sepia), so I don't have a strong opinion about which version looks better. They both look out of focus and colourless. - 407:
Legally Nightscream is correct, but I personally think he should act in good faith and respect the photographer's wishes.
1701:
Perhaps I mispoke in using the word "presented"... perhaps I should have said tht I do not believe information should be
1202: 187:. I myself have had photos of mine cropped, as with the pic that currently serves as the main accompanying photo in the 99:
On the project page it is stated "As an example in its simplest form..." followed by example image markup that includes
1729: 23: 1117:. Since we can't very well knock heads together over the web, what's the right forum for resolving such disputes? 807: 490:
I agree with that, too. There's no issue for here; let's take the image choice question to the article talk page.
45: 938: 918: 866: 769: 758: 133: 118: 1162:
Either "ask" approach will work, but if you don't know the copyright status, you should NOT upload the images.
163:, and added the cropped version to the article, see here, which devotes more of the space to Steranko, as seen 1317: 54: 17: 1186:) that image galleries are against WP policy. I doubt that's the case, but do we have any guidance on them?-- 1551: 1516: 1489: 1311: 1226: 581: 438: 1401:
The SVG files you uploaded appear to be corrupt in some way... Firefox doesn't want to open them. Did you
1255: 1167: 1122: 1045: 600: 268: 1089:
All the examples omit periods at the end of captions. Is this standard practice/policy for the project?
473: 200: 1351:
I have renamed the file without the offending chars and you should be able to insert it now as needed.
931: 911: 1391: 1043:
Worked on it a bit, was able to reduce the distortion only a little without losing too much detail.
950:
Getting the Moire (or maybe you call it something else) out of digitized images of halftone originals
889: 828: 454: 412: 129: 114: 1622: 1706:
mearly use the image to illustrate information that is properly discussed in the text (and cited).
1210: 1187: 1152: 774: 730: 662: 160: 1711: 1672: 1609:
Generally, when an image is to be used by multiple Wikimedia projects, it's best to upload it to
1599: 1547: 1512: 1485: 1379: 1304: 1283: 1238: 1191: 495: 434: 287: 236: 216: 363: 1688: 1631: 1610: 1461: 1411: 1334: 1251: 1163: 1118: 1075: 1051: 1011: 995: 974: 646: 596: 522: 378: 324: 264: 1344: 1094: 1028: 741: 712: 694: 614:
Is there a policy, guideline, or style guide that excludes images in lists as referenced in
553: 469: 348: 196: 188: 777: 726: 184: 1387: 824: 675: 450: 408: 633:
Not that I know of in fact I use images in lists all the time. See these 2 for examples:
346:
can't modify it. I suspect such a license may not be acceptable at Commons, however. --
1741: 1715: 1692: 1676: 1640: 1603: 1574: 1555: 1540: 1520: 1505: 1493: 1470: 1453:
Anyway, they should be working now. And they look like great, useful images. Thanks!!
1420: 1395: 1367: 1363: 1287: 1259: 1244: 1214: 1206: 1195: 1171: 1156: 1148: 1126: 1098: 1079: 1057: 1034: 1015: 999: 978: 895: 870: 832: 817: 784: 744: 716: 698: 679: 650: 627: 604: 585: 557: 526: 499: 477: 458: 416: 382: 352: 328: 291: 272: 249: 137: 122: 359: 1737: 1707: 1668: 1595: 1279: 1231: 766: 491: 283: 230: 954: 1684: 1626: 1456: 1406: 1071: 1007: 991: 970: 642: 620: 518: 371: 317: 225: 156: 148: 1617:. I can include it in a Knowledge (XXG) page via the regular syntax, ]. Commons 551:
be used in a particular article should be taken to the article discussion page. --
1425:
I was able to get them to render properly by loading in Inkscape, and saving as "
1378:
I made two images as I always do in illustrator: it tells me they are malicious!
1623:
Knowledge (XXG):COMMONS#How_to_move_an_image_from_Wikipedia_to_Wikimedia_Commons
1569: 1535: 1500: 1340: 1090: 1024: 738: 708: 690: 53:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
1667:
for information. Does anyone object to adding a statement along these lines?
1405:
update Adobe Illustrator or the SVG export plugin recently? I'll have a look.
1297:
On the one hand, WP insists that in order to reach GA or FA level, an article
1144: 671: 667: 211: 1438: 1354: 796: 595:
Why are images in the File namespace instead of the Image namespace now? --
1352: 1733: 762: 152: 1442: 733:
guideline page. I posted the same suggestion at the other discussion:
144:
Question about a photographer's displeasure with my crop of his PD pic
757:
So, what would I need to do to go about translating the contents of
449:
better illustrates the subject, so, a close up picture of his face.
1225:
I can't find anything anywhere about this, but for images such as
953: 159:. I didn't think it made the best use of the available space, so 1434: 1143:
Should I contact Remo himself and ask him to release one under
95:
Why are we telling users to place |right when it is a default?
32: 849:
The "File:" prefix may be used interchangeably with "Image:":
1615:
commons:File:Processor_families_in_TOP500_supercomputers.svg
735:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Manual of Style#Large numbers of images
635:
List of Medal of Honor recipients for the Battle of Iwo Jima
1386:... what am I doing wrong? (it never gave me that before)-- 1327:
I spotted this particular image that I want to put in the
794:
Maybe we should move this to Knowledge (XXG):Files. --—
1183: 990:
Or would there be a better place to post this question?
615: 192: 171: 164: 1655:
information that is stated in the article, and should
143: 302:
How can there be a "no-derivatives restriction" on a
24:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Manual of Style/Images/Archive 3
1266:
RfC to increase the default thumbnail size of images
761:very useful page? Do I need special permissions? 1651:I strongly feel that an image should be used to 1278:after many years. All input is welcome. Thanks. 1203:Knowledge (XXG):Image use policy#Image galleries 729:talk page, because the question relates to the 1589:Using images from foreign language wikipedias 8: 1104:Looking for an image-specific noticeboard 103:, despite that right hand placement is a 639:List of Jewish Medal of Honor recipients 1293:Knowledge (XXG)'s bonkers image policy 576:I like raster images they are cool. -- 51:Do not edit the contents of this page. 958:Jafet Lindeborg Nome Businessman 1905 7: 1530:subject matter does play a part and 1292: 1384:File:Microarray exp horizontal.svg 31: 1534:museums sometimes assert rights. 191:article, which was cropped from 36: 1730:File:Fr unapproachable east.jpg 685:I started a similar discussion 155:to Steranko's article, as seen 1245:06:18, 28 September 2009 (UTC) 1215:17:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC) 1196:07:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC) 657:Number of images in an article 1: 1742:15:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC) 1716:19:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC) 1693:18:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC) 1677:14:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC) 558:20:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC) 527:23:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC) 500:20:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC) 478:17:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC) 459:06:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC) 443:02:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC) 417:00:52, 22 February 2009 (UTC) 383:20:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC) 353:14:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC) 329:20:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC) 292:19:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC) 273:18:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC) 250:18:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC) 205:05:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC) 1641:16:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 1604:10:20, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 1575:04:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 1556:01:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 1541:00:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 1521:23:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 1506:22:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 1494:22:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 1471:22:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 1421:22:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 1396:13:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 1368:03:31, 18 October 2009 (UTC) 1318:08:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC) 153:a nice photo of Jim Steranko 138:13:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC) 123:11:59, 18 January 2009 (UTC) 1288:01:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC) 1260:03:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC) 1172:03:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC) 1157:14:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC) 907:for the Poker Hall of Fame? 18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Images 1757: 1479:Can museum photos be used? 1066:Should it be Image or File 1035:16:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 969:For instance see at right: 833:01:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC) 818:06:44, 23 April 2009 (UTC) 785:20:07, 21 April 2009 (UTC) 628:22:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC) 605:02:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC) 586:00:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC) 1080:20:14, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 1016:20:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 1000:20:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 979:21:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 944:16:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC) 924:14:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 680:13:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC) 651:20:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 1127:22:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC) 1099:22:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC) 1058:00:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC) 896:14:29, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 772:Knowledge (XXG)'s rules: 745:22:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC) 717:22:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC) 699:11:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC) 1560:Not quite. The museum 1437:renderer, used both by 1227:File:FernandoTorres.jpg 1085:Punctuation in captions 871:04:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC) 959: 957: 49:of past discussions. 1433:SVG". It seems the 1182:It is claimed (e.g. 901:Non-Free entity logo 879:Images not uploading 1663:information or as a 663:policy or guideline 1724:Old image question 1429:SVG" rather than " 1404: 1380:File:NA hybrid.svg 1274:size of 180px has 960: 217:New York Comic Con 170:K72ndst then left 1647:Why we use images 1639: 1611:Wikimedia Commons 1469: 1419: 1402: 1366: 1272:default thumbnail 1270:The issue of the 816: 773: 753:Image translation 377: 323: 174:on my Talk Page: 105:default parameter 89: 88: 61: 60: 55:current talk page 22:(Redirected from 1748: 1629: 1572: 1538: 1503: 1459: 1409: 1362: 1359: 1314: 1307: 1241: 1234: 1056: 1054: 1049: 934: 914: 892: 887: 814: 810: 809:my contributions 806: 802: 799: 790:Move to new name 781: 765: 623: 376: 374: 369: 322: 320: 315: 248: 245: 239: 233: 193:a more full shot 189:Richard Dreyfuss 111: 102: 80: 63: 62: 40: 39: 33: 27: 1756: 1755: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1726: 1649: 1591: 1570: 1536: 1501: 1481: 1376: 1355: 1325: 1312: 1305: 1295: 1268: 1239: 1232: 1223: 1180: 1134: 1106: 1087: 1068: 1052: 1046: 1044: 952: 932: 929:figured out.--- 912: 903: 890: 884: 881: 863:199.125.109.126 812: 808: 804: 797: 792: 782: 779: 755: 659: 621: 612: 610:images in lists 593: 574: 372: 370: 318: 316: 243: 237: 231: 229: 219:article, which 146: 130:Fuhghettaboutit 115:Fuhghettaboutit 109: 100: 97: 76: 37: 29: 28: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1754: 1752: 1725: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1696: 1695: 1648: 1645: 1644: 1643: 1590: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1480: 1477: 1476: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1454: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1375: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1324: 1321: 1294: 1291: 1276:come to a head 1267: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1222: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1179: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1133: 1130: 1105: 1102: 1086: 1083: 1067: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1038: 1037: 1019: 1018: 986: 984: 983: 982: 981: 951: 948: 947: 946: 933:I'm Spartacus! 913:I'm Spartacus! 902: 899: 880: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 850: 842: 841: 840: 839: 791: 788: 778: 754: 751: 750: 749: 748: 747: 720: 719: 701: 658: 655: 654: 653: 611: 608: 592: 589: 573: 570: 569: 568: 567: 566: 565: 564: 563: 562: 561: 560: 536: 535: 534: 533: 532: 531: 530: 529: 507: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 483: 482: 481: 480: 462: 461: 435:Richard Cavell 430: 429: 428: 427: 426: 425: 424: 423: 422: 421: 420: 419: 394: 393: 392: 391: 390: 389: 388: 387: 386: 385: 336: 335: 334: 333: 332: 331: 295: 294: 278: 277: 276: 275: 260: 253: 252: 145: 142: 141: 140: 96: 93: 91: 87: 86: 81: 74: 69: 59: 58: 41: 30: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1753: 1744: 1743: 1739: 1735: 1731: 1723: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1704: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1697: 1694: 1690: 1686: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1674: 1670: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1654: 1646: 1642: 1637: 1633: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1601: 1597: 1588: 1576: 1573: 1567: 1563: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1553: 1549: 1548:BashBrannigan 1544: 1543: 1542: 1539: 1533: 1529: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1513:BashBrannigan 1509: 1508: 1507: 1504: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1491: 1487: 1486:BashBrannigan 1478: 1472: 1467: 1463: 1458: 1455: 1452: 1447: 1446: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1417: 1413: 1408: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1381: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1360: 1358: 1353: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1346: 1342: 1336: 1335: 1332: 1330: 1323:Image problem 1322: 1320: 1319: 1316: 1315: 1310: 1308: 1300: 1290: 1289: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1265: 1261: 1257: 1253: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1242: 1236: 1235: 1228: 1220: 1216: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1199: 1198: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1177: 1173: 1169: 1165: 1161: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1146: 1141: 1139: 1131: 1129: 1128: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1103: 1101: 1100: 1096: 1092: 1084: 1082: 1081: 1077: 1073: 1065: 1059: 1055: 1050: 1048: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1036: 1032: 1031: 1026: 1021: 1020: 1017: 1013: 1009: 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 997: 993: 988: 980: 976: 972: 968: 967: 966: 965: 964: 956: 949: 945: 942: 941: 940: 936: 935: 928: 927: 926: 925: 922: 921: 920: 916: 915: 908: 900: 898: 897: 894: 893: 878: 872: 868: 864: 859: 858: 857: 856: 848: 847: 846: 845: 844: 843: 836: 835: 834: 830: 826: 822: 821: 820: 819: 815: 811: 801: 800: 789: 787: 786: 783: 775: 771: 768: 764: 760: 752: 746: 743: 740: 736: 732: 728: 724: 723: 722: 721: 718: 714: 710: 706: 702: 700: 696: 692: 688: 684: 683: 682: 681: 677: 673: 669: 664: 656: 652: 648: 644: 640: 636: 632: 631: 630: 629: 625: 624: 617: 609: 607: 606: 602: 598: 590: 588: 587: 583: 579: 578:98.162.148.46 571: 559: 556: 555: 550: 546: 545: 544: 543: 542: 541: 540: 539: 538: 537: 528: 524: 520: 515: 514: 513: 512: 511: 510: 509: 508: 501: 497: 493: 489: 488: 487: 486: 485: 484: 479: 475: 471: 466: 465: 464: 463: 460: 456: 452: 447: 446: 445: 444: 440: 436: 418: 414: 410: 406: 405: 404: 403: 402: 401: 400: 399: 398: 397: 396: 395: 384: 381: 380: 379: 375: 365: 361: 356: 355: 354: 351: 350: 344: 343: 342: 341: 340: 339: 338: 337: 330: 327: 326: 325: 321: 310: 305: 301: 300: 299: 298: 297: 296: 293: 289: 285: 280: 279: 274: 270: 266: 261: 257: 256: 255: 254: 251: 246: 240: 234: 227: 222: 218: 213: 209: 208: 207: 206: 202: 198: 194: 190: 186: 180: 179: 178: 173: 168: 166: 162: 158: 154: 150: 139: 135: 131: 127: 126: 125: 124: 120: 116: 106: 94: 92: 85: 82: 79: 75: 73: 70: 68: 65: 64: 56: 52: 48: 47: 42: 35: 34: 25: 19: 1727: 1702: 1664: 1660: 1656: 1652: 1650: 1618: 1592: 1565: 1561: 1531: 1527: 1482: 1430: 1426: 1377: 1356: 1337: 1333: 1326: 1303: 1298: 1296: 1271: 1269: 1252:WhatamIdoing 1230: 1224: 1181: 1164:WhatamIdoing 1142: 1135: 1119:WhatamIdoing 1107: 1088: 1069: 1053:XANDERLIPTAK 1047: 1029: 989: 985: 961: 939: 937: 930: 919: 917: 910: 904: 888: 882: 803: 795: 793: 756: 704: 660: 619: 613: 597:Fangoriously 594: 575: 552: 548: 431: 368: 367: 347: 314: 313: 308: 303: 265:WhatamIdoing 259:restriction. 226:Jim Steranko 220: 181: 176: 175: 172:this message 169: 161:I cropped it 149:User:K72ndst 147: 113:something?-- 104: 98: 90: 77: 50: 44: 1659:be used to 1566:contractual 1221:Attribution 661:Is there a 554:Philosopher 470:Nightscream 349:Philosopher 197:Nightscream 43:This is an 1703:introduced 1653:illustrate 1388:Squidonius 825:Funandtrvl 668:Whale tail 451:Jerry teps 309:derivative 1511:exhibits? 1439:MediaWiki 1374:malicious 1207:Optigan13 1178:galleries 1149:Itachi007 891:Shankbone 731:WP:Images 616:this edit 591:Namespace 409:Timeshift 373:JGHowes 319:JGHowes 84:Archive 4 78:Archive 3 72:Archive 2 67:Archive 1 1708:Blueboar 1669:Blueboar 1596:Quillaja 1431:Inkscape 1329:SAJ page 1280:Dabomb87 1233:Ksy92003 1188:Kotniski 1132:confused 492:Dicklyon 364:WP:ICTIC 360:non-free 284:Dicklyon 244:contribs 232:Asmeurer 1685:Dankarl 1661:present 1636:contrib 1632:ǝɹʎℲxoɯ 1627:Moxfyre 1466:contrib 1462:ǝɹʎℲxoɯ 1457:Moxfyre 1443:Firefox 1416:contrib 1412:ǝɹʎℲxoɯ 1407:Moxfyre 1306:Serendi 1145:CCA 2.0 1072:Kumioko 1008:Kumioko 992:Dankarl 971:Dankarl 780:complex 643:Kumioko 622:pd_THOR 519:K72ndst 212:license 46:archive 1665:source 1571:Durova 1537:Durova 1502:Durova 1403:upload 1341:Ominae 1091:SharkD 742:(Talk) 739:Finell 727:WP:MOS 709:SharkD 691:SharkD 618:? — 572:Raster 549:should 185:WP:OWN 151:added 101:|right 1427:Plain 1006:it.-- 886:David 885:: --> 672:L0b0t 16:< 1738:talk 1712:talk 1689:talk 1673:talk 1619:only 1600:talk 1552:talk 1517:talk 1490:talk 1441:and 1435:RSVG 1392:talk 1382:and 1364:talk 1357:MECU 1345:talk 1299:must 1284:talk 1256:talk 1240:talk 1211:talk 1201:See 1192:talk 1184:here 1168:talk 1153:talk 1138:here 1123:talk 1115:here 1113:and 1111:here 1095:talk 1076:talk 1030:talk 1012:talk 996:talk 975:talk 867:talk 829:talk 798:HK22 759:this 713:talk 695:talk 687:here 676:talk 647:talk 601:talk 582:talk 523:talk 496:talk 474:talk 455:talk 439:talk 413:talk 304:free 288:talk 269:talk 238:talk 201:talk 165:here 157:here 134:talk 119:talk 1734:BOZ 1657:not 1625:. 1562:may 1532:yes 1528:yes 1331:. 1313:ous 1205:. - 1109:are 1025:RJH 909:--- 770:(c) 767:(t) 763:WLU 705:all 641:.-- 1740:) 1714:) 1691:) 1675:) 1602:) 1554:) 1519:) 1492:) 1464:| 1414:| 1394:) 1347:) 1286:) 1258:) 1243:) 1213:) 1194:) 1170:) 1155:) 1125:) 1097:) 1078:) 1033:) 1014:) 998:) 977:) 869:) 831:) 715:) 697:) 689:. 678:) 649:) 637:, 626:| 603:) 584:) 525:) 498:) 476:) 457:) 441:) 415:) 366:. 290:) 271:) 241:♬ 221:is 203:) 167:. 136:) 121:) 1736:( 1710:( 1687:( 1671:( 1638:) 1634:| 1630:( 1598:( 1550:( 1515:( 1488:( 1468:) 1460:( 1418:) 1410:( 1390:( 1361:≈ 1343:( 1282:( 1254:( 1237:( 1209:( 1190:( 1166:( 1151:( 1121:( 1093:( 1074:( 1027:( 1010:( 994:( 973:( 865:( 827:( 813:/ 805:\ 776:/ 737:. 711:( 693:( 674:( 645:( 599:( 580:( 521:( 494:( 472:( 453:( 437:( 411:( 286:( 267:( 247:) 235:( 199:( 132:( 117:( 110:] 57:. 26:)

Index

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Images
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Manual of Style/Images/Archive 3
archive
current talk page
Archive 1
Archive 2
Archive 3
Archive 4
Fuhghettaboutit
talk
11:59, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Fuhghettaboutit
talk
13:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
User:K72ndst
a nice photo of Jim Steranko
here
I cropped it
here
this message
WP:OWN
Richard Dreyfuss
a more full shot
Nightscream
talk
05:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
license
New York Comic Con
Jim Steranko
Asmeurer

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.