User talk:David Vasquez~enwiki/Archive 3

China Collaboration of the Week

You showed interest in taking part in China-related topic development. I have just set up a China Collaboration of the Week. Please add one, or several, nomination(s) and tell others about it. You may access it via the COTW page at Wikipedia:China-related topics notice board/ZHCOTW or through the shortcut WP:ZHCOTW. --[[User:OldakQuill|Oldak Quill]] 11:21, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi David

I saw your work on Shenyang's page. I am from Harbin and livin' in US now. Your edition on Shenyang was a big change. Thank you for your fabulous job on one of my favorite cities in China.

Lin Yang

Photographs for Chinese art

I think pictures you take in a museum will be able to be displayed in the Chinese art article. According to Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags#Public_domain_art, the art is public domain if the artist died more than 100 years ago. — J3ff 00:50, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Actually, in most countries it passes into the public domain 70 years after the creator's death. 100 years is the catch-all upper limit. If _you_ take a photograph in a museum, and the scene has not been arranged in a creative way (for example using creative lighting or framing) then the resulting image will be public domain just as the original work. If _you_ used creativity in taking the photograph, portions may be copyrighted to you. Some claim that a photograph of a statue or other 3D art is always copyrighted to the photographer. — David Remahl 13:51, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing up some additional considerations about photographing exhibits in museums.

There is still one troublesome problem, which is that a number of museums say you can take photographs for personal use, but not for distribution, and especially not for commercial use. (Otherwise they want to be paid.)

My question is this. If I walk up to a painting and photograph it under natural light, with no flash (according to the museum's wishes), being careful not to include the wall or the frame, can a museum still lay claim to my photograph solely by virtue of it hanging in their building?

I don't have the money to consult an attorney on this simply so I can contribute to the Chinese art article, so I need some "free" advice on this.

Perhaps I should post this question on Fred Bauder's talk page?

Thanks. --DV 14:04, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I am not a lawyer, _especially_ not in the United States :-). The only thing I know is that the museum cannot lay _copyright_ claims on the photograph simply because it was taken on their premises, regardless of their rules. If you agreed to a verbal or written contract of some sort, then I suppose they may have a case against you, but not a copyright case. In either case, I don't think _Wikipedia_ could be held liable (though that is probably not your primary concern).

For more advice and verification of this, post a question on Wikipedia:Reference desk or Wikipedia:Village pump. — David Remahl 14:11, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Copy editing

You're more than welcome, David, and thank you for the kind words. I intend to take a look at Wikinews soon, but I'm still finding my feet here, so I'll wait for a bit. That's a good article you've written, and yes, I think it's sufficiently NPOV. What an interesting and strange case. It's reminding me of the case of the two New Zealand teenagers, girls, who fell in love in a teenager sort of way. A family move threatened to split them up, so they killed one of the mothers. It was made into a film called Heavenly Creatures with Kate Winslet [[1]]. Slim 10:32, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

David, that's fine; don't feel you need to explain, as it's your article. The reason I put 16 in the first paragraph was for shock value. With an article like that, you have to bang, bang, bang in the lead with the news value: 16 year old girl, charged, first degree murder, own mother. It will always be true that she was 16 when she was charged; and her birth date is lower down in the article. But I'm not trying to persuade you to change it back; just explaining my reasoning. As I said, you've done the writing, and it's a great article, so I defer to your fine authorship.  :-) Slim 10:44, Nov 29, 2004

Not wishing to tie you up with murder stories, but now you're on the subject of how nasty little girls can (allegedly!) be, Wikipedia has an entry for Anne Perry, who was one of the girls (the real life ones) featured in the Heavenly Creatures film. She went on to become quite a well-known novelist. Thought it might interest you. Slim 10:48, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

Oh, I agree entirely about not changing the spelling in her journal. I certainly didn't mean to. If I changed anything, it was inadvertent. My apologies. Slim 10:51, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

Video Poker

Thanks for the interesting content you added to the Video poker article, I work as a Blackjack dealer part-time and have also worked around the slots, as far as I know, in the Netherlands there are no slots that allow players to achieve a theoretical advantage, and I have always thought this was the case world-wide. I found it intrigueing that this is actually not true. But as Dutch casinos use modified slots from big brands like IGT, I wonder if all our slots are really what we were taught them to be. I will be sure to check out the payou tables on them soon enough. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\^talk]] 21:19, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

Political viewpoints

You have my permission to add the necessary snippets needed to implement your idea regarding the political survey poll to the subpage of my user page. It sounds like a fun idea. --Improv 05:53, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

RFA candidate

Salve, David!
I nominated myself for adminship at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/PedanticallySpeaking2 and would appreciate your vote. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 19:44, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

• Salve, David!
  I wanted to drop you a line to thank you for your support in my successful RFA candidacy. It was very gratifying to see the kind remarks posted in the debate. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 17:32, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)

Article deletion

Can you please undo your delete action? — DV 11:21, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, Dave. I thought it was a newly created junk page. You are right - I should have checked. I also should not be editing when I am tired. Going against wikipedia policy was unintentional. I'll see if I can find a way to undelete, but don't know if it's possible. Pollinator 12:24, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Follow up on Pollinator's user talk page. DV 12:49, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

---

Thanks DV

I'm just learning about all this stuff. Thanks for taking the time to help me out. I'm a little confused right now because I'm new and old (how's that for an oximoron). If you notice me asking some other (newbie) questions please feel free to jump in and help. Your links were very helpful.

Thanks, [[User:Hydnjo| Hydnjo\^talk]] 04:25, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Legal fund

Hi David, if you want to set up a legal fund, could I suggest you e-mail that person privately? Making a public reference to the libel serves to spread it further, which I think he's saying he doesn't want, as he has removed all references to it from his Talk page. Best, Slim 22:53, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)

I replied on Slim's talk page. — DV 04:32, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I agree with the point you made about the elephant in the room. No, I don't think my revert affected it. But at least I didn't point it out. Perhaps I'm very slow, but the first I learned of this odd website was through the previous posts on Jimbo's Talk page the other day. I deleted your reference to it because he deleted theirs, and that looked to me as though he didn't want references to the matter on his Talk page. However, as I said, I won't keep on deleting them. If he wants to, he'll do it himself eventually. My personal view with issues like this is they're best ignored. As you say, the page has been cached all over the place already. Legal action won't get rid of it. It will simply draw more attention to it and there's no point in taking legal action against groups or individuals who have no money. People always think suing for libel is easy. It isn't. It's one of the hardest issues to win on, even if you're in the right, especially in America. People almost always regret suing for libel. Having said all that, I should stress that I know you mean well and have the best of intentions, and I do absolutely agree with you on that count. Slim 04:39, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

Rachelle Waterman

The tone of your responses suggests that you are becoming agitated. Giano 13:55, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I replied on Giano's talk page. — DV 14:10, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Giano promptly blanked and archived his talk page.

(actually it was 2 days later Giano 12:23, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC))

For someone who thinks "debate is futile" he sure is a persistent little bugger. :) I promised Giano I would stay off his pages so I will reply here. The history of Giano's user talk page shows that he blanked and archived his page exactly 32 minutes after my last comment. He's making himself look silly by arguing over such a small point, but I have indulged him since he insisted on resuming our little exchange, despite my offer to stay out of his way. — DV 12:47, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I had encouraged Giano to edit the article in question, or to even list the article on VfD, and assured him that I would not revert his changes. But Giano left in a huff and accused me of being "territorial", whatever that means. When I repeated my invitation for him to edit the article however he saw fit, to address his "human rights" concerns, he accused me of "hectoring" him and said I only wanted the last word.

I hope Giano will share a bit more about why this is a human rights issue, perhaps on the Wikipedia:Ethics and law page, but he appears to feel somehow bullied or intimidated from sharing his views at the moment.

In my closing remarks, I apologized to Giano for any discomfort he felt when encountering my different opinions, and I promised to stay out of his way in the future. — DV 10:46, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Is that your last word, or are there to be more? Giano 14:42, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I am flattered that Giano has started following me around to other pages.

However, in all fairness to Bishonen, I am hopeful Giano will work out his issues with me on one of our talk pages. — DV 15:00, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Giano, if you have changed your mind about the "futility of debate" and would like to engage me in a thoughtful discussion concerning the Rachelle Waterman article, (or some other related topic), I am more than happy to do so.

Otherwise, I am happy to stay out of your way, but that will only work if you stop following me to other pages and trying to resume our little exchange.

By the way, I apologize that I didn't realize English was not your native language until just now. Apparently you have improved your English skills enough that it took me a while to catch on that perhaps you didn't fully understand my statements.

If I have said anything that you don't understand or you are somehow confused, please say so and I will be happy to clarify any misunderstanding due to language differences.

You are more than welcome to have the last word, Giano. It's your Wikipedia too!

Cheers,

— DV 15:00, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oh dear, you are becoming confused, the discussion on Bishonen's talk page (who is following who, I wonder) concerned the Troll on User talk:Chmod007's talk page, who Bishonen and I have been monitoring, you really must not start to feel paranoid. Bishonen and I have worked together on several pages and you have nothing to worry about. I terminated conversation with you on the talk page of Rachelle Waterman there as you suggested that was not the place to have it, "lurking" I think was your phrase. Please have no worry about calling me a "irritating little bugger" Irritating: to you I may be; Little: not very; Bugger: Never greatly appealed. However I do not generally use these expressions, as I have quite a good vocabulary.

Please have no concern for my English, 3 years in an American law school honed it to near perfection (spelling and grammar aside) so please do not level the veiled charge again that I am anti-American, or that I am particularly pro-British. For reasons I stated on the Featured article page (when you nominated it) the page cannot be deleted; nor is it violating the law of any country. I merely state as I have always stated that it is a great pity the page cannot be held in abeyance until after a verdict. If that is not possible then perhaps without her image. Regarding human rights, yes I think all humans are entitled to them, even those who have violated the same rights of other human beings, it it what distinguishes us from lesser forms of animate beings, and wether you agree or not it is my belief that parading prisoners, minors or adults,in orange jump suits publicly before conviction is a sight many people, on both sides of the Atlantic, find abhorrent.

Finally, contrary to your inference on the RW talkpage, I have never advocated the British press as superior to the North American. I think that's all, anything you find ambiguous, or outside your vocabulary please do ask. Giano 15:54, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image size

Thanks, David. Would that really be possible? It sounds so simple! It would be a major improvement, I can't believe it hasn't already been done. I don't know my way around with that kind of stuff—it would be great if you'd post a suggestion or query in the best place for it. (MetaWiki... ?) Best, [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (talk)]] 10:34, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I replied on Bishonen's talk page. — DV 11:06, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

A mistake

That's a mistake about Giano following you to my talk page, David. He's a friend of mine and posts frequently on my page, as do I on his.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (talk)]] 16:37, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

My mistake, I didn't realize Giano was referring to a troll on Chmod007's page who had a friend that shared my first name, "David". (See Giano's explanation above.)

Here is the timeline of events in case it is unclear what transpired:

Immediately after I posted on a completely unrelated topic on Bishonen's talk page, Giano came along and posted:

"One starts nice and pleasant and reasonable!Giano 13:46, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)"

What confused me is that Bishonen initially didn't know what Giano was talking about either, and it seemed like a bit of a stretch that Giano would be posting about an edit conflict with a "mutual friend" of "David's" and somehow was not referring to me. Bishonen then replied to Giano,

"Uh, what? We had an edit conflict, or is this in re the previous post on my page?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (talk)]] 14:01, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)"

The previous post on Bishonen's page had been mine at that moment. And Giano replied,

"No, I was attempting to leave a message on the page of a mutual 'friend' Giano 14:05, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)"

"sorry, that's ambiguous David's friend!" (<- also posted by Giano, but unsigned)

For these reasons, I did not realize that Giano was posting about someone else named "David" on Bishonen's page, and that he was referring to a completely different matter. Quite the coincidence, eh?

I appreciate the efforts of Bishonen and Giano to clear up my apparent confusion.

— DV 21:48, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)