Difference between revisions of "User talk:Guardsman"
(comment) |
|||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:::Hello Guardsman, this is what [[Fanon]] means. If you create the art work, then its considered fanon. When you list the source for such as your Rim Terrorities info, you have give the actual name of the thing. Even if there no article. Such example if a map comes from [[Handbook: Major Periphery States]], you put the name such the one i've just listed here and page number and who created. Images that are slightly twik aren't quite consider fanon, but we note that they have been say colorized, when original was not. Alot folks are very specific about where canon info comes from. Example your, [[:File:Rim Territories (3130).png]] image does not give actual line name of map/book/file/etc it comes from. If comes from 3130 Map from Classicbattletech.com's source, we use the name writers/authors at Catayst Game Labs gave it. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 06:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC) | :::Hello Guardsman, this is what [[Fanon]] means. If you create the art work, then its considered fanon. When you list the source for such as your Rim Terrorities info, you have give the actual name of the thing. Even if there no article. Such example if a map comes from [[Handbook: Major Periphery States]], you put the name such the one i've just listed here and page number and who created. Images that are slightly twik aren't quite consider fanon, but we note that they have been say colorized, when original was not. Alot folks are very specific about where canon info comes from. Example your, [[:File:Rim Territories (3130).png]] image does not give actual line name of map/book/file/etc it comes from. If comes from 3130 Map from Classicbattletech.com's source, we use the name writers/authors at Catayst Game Labs gave it. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 06:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC) | ||
::You know what, it’s not worth this kind of aggravation. I’m not even American, Wrangler apparently does not speak English, yet he’s doing things to things, before I finish even editing them, to basically say that I can be sued. This is not worth the hours I’ve already spent in “PREPERATION AND RESEARCH”. This is not worth the hassle or the stress.-- [[User:Guardsman|Guardsman]] 06:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC) | ::You know what, it’s not worth this kind of aggravation. I’m not even American, Wrangler apparently does not speak English, yet he’s doing things to things, before I finish even editing them, to basically say that I can be sued. This is not worth the hours I’ve already spent in “PREPERATION AND RESEARCH”. This is not worth the hassle or the stress.-- [[User:Guardsman|Guardsman]] 06:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC) | ||
+ | :::You're welcome to contribute, and I thank you for what you have contributed so far. | ||
+ | :::Wrangler and Revanche merely tried to lend a guiding hand by pointing out that you're obviously unwittingly violating community rules as laid down in our [[Policy:Images]], and that we do have that policy in place for a reason. It's hardly fair to call that an aggravation. Providing sources is essential, as it allows all contributors to verify the origin, canonicity and reliability of a given information (be it written or graphic). There was also no indication that you weren't finished editing them (there are tags to indicate this such as <nowiki> {{Inuse}}, {{Underconstruction}} or {{Stub}}</nowiki>). I do realize that many articles and image files aren't up to our standards yet, but that's all the more reason to heed the rules. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 08:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:57, 21 February 2011
Welcome
Images and Copyright problems
Hello, Guardsman. Welcome to Sarna.net! Recently saw you upload some images, which been colorized and do not cite percide source they came from. Any image or content that does not come from a canon source, needs to have notation that cites that its fanom. Template gallery lists the proper templates and how to apply them. Thanks! -- Wrangler 02:02, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hey, Guardsman. If you don't mind, I'll translate Wrangler's written English for you a bit, to explain what he is trying to help you on. When he refers to citing your source, it means that it has to include more than just the artist, but also the actual source of the material (preferably with page number). Also, as BTW is not an image repository, each image uploaded must be quickly associated with an article or it risks deletion. If you have any further questions or need help rectifying these issues, please let me know. You will also find Policy:Images to be helpful.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 03:43, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- I am in the process of overhauling entries for the Oberon Confederaton, Rim Collection, Rim Territories, and Rim Worlds Republic. I am doing most of the work in Microsoft Word for now, but I have uploaded some images to make sure that the links will work when I add the overhauled text. I am not sure what the term “fanom” means, but I will add sources to the images I’ve uploaded. I was recently talking to someone on ClassicBattleTech.com and I realised that I have a bit of an encyclopaedic knowledge of the Rim Worlds Republic and its successors, I have access to a wide variety of sources, with a fairly good idea of where to find canon sources that support my claims, and that Sarna was somewhat lacking in this area, so rather than ignore it, I’m going to do something about it to help the BattleTech community.-- Guardsman 04:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hello Guardsman, this is what Fanon means. If you create the art work, then its considered fanon. When you list the source for such as your Rim Terrorities info, you have give the actual name of the thing. Even if there no article. Such example if a map comes from Handbook: Major Periphery States, you put the name such the one i've just listed here and page number and who created. Images that are slightly twik aren't quite consider fanon, but we note that they have been say colorized, when original was not. Alot folks are very specific about where canon info comes from. Example your, File:Rim Territories (3130).png image does not give actual line name of map/book/file/etc it comes from. If comes from 3130 Map from Classicbattletech.com's source, we use the name writers/authors at Catayst Game Labs gave it. -- Wrangler 06:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- You know what, it’s not worth this kind of aggravation. I’m not even American, Wrangler apparently does not speak English, yet he’s doing things to things, before I finish even editing them, to basically say that I can be sued. This is not worth the hours I’ve already spent in “PREPERATION AND RESEARCH”. This is not worth the hassle or the stress.-- Guardsman 06:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- You're welcome to contribute, and I thank you for what you have contributed so far.
- Wrangler and Revanche merely tried to lend a guiding hand by pointing out that you're obviously unwittingly violating community rules as laid down in our Policy:Images, and that we do have that policy in place for a reason. It's hardly fair to call that an aggravation. Providing sources is essential, as it allows all contributors to verify the origin, canonicity and reliability of a given information (be it written or graphic). There was also no indication that you weren't finished editing them (there are tags to indicate this such as {{Inuse}}, {{Underconstruction}} or {{Stub}}). I do realize that many articles and image files aren't up to our standards yet, but that's all the more reason to heed the rules. Frabby 08:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- I am in the process of overhauling entries for the Oberon Confederaton, Rim Collection, Rim Territories, and Rim Worlds Republic. I am doing most of the work in Microsoft Word for now, but I have uploaded some images to make sure that the links will work when I add the overhauled text. I am not sure what the term “fanom” means, but I will add sources to the images I’ve uploaded. I was recently talking to someone on ClassicBattleTech.com and I realised that I have a bit of an encyclopaedic knowledge of the Rim Worlds Republic and its successors, I have access to a wide variety of sources, with a fairly good idea of where to find canon sources that support my claims, and that Sarna was somewhat lacking in this area, so rather than ignore it, I’m going to do something about it to help the BattleTech community.-- Guardsman 04:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)