User talk:A Plumbing I Will Go

A Plumbing I Will Go

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, ELizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris with arm in the air.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, ELizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris with arm in the air.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file licensed as "for non-commercial use only", "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only", or "used with permission"; and it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:

state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
add the relevant copyright tag and if necessary, a complete fair use rationale.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 14:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you for the notification. I had actually tried to find "fair use" on the list of reasons, but I didn't see anything. Thanks for your advice, and I'll be more careful in the future. A Plumbing I Will Go (talk) 14:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia extremely strict when it comes to copyrighted non-free images (more than just is legally required). See WP:NFC/WP:NFCC. Basically you can't use non-free images outside of articles (so no talk pages or drafts can use them) and each needs a justification (an WP:NFCC) explaining why it is needed to better understand the text. E.g. the GIF of musk currently in the article (File:Elon Musk gesture.gif) gives the following rationale: The file will be used to illustrate a section of the article currently titled "Accusations of antisemitism" that describes the salute and the reactions to it, including the comparisons made to a Nazi or fascist salute. A video is necessary in order for readers to decide whether or not they believe those comparisons are justified. (I actually don't think that's a very well written justification. I'd probably say more about how the movement is needed to understand the full point of the text, but I digress)

I think we would need a lot more sourced text specifically about those four images (from reliable sources) before we could think about including them. If you have any other questions feel free to ask, or ask at WP:CPN/WT:NFC. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 15:10, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you very much for both of your comments. I had been (mistakenly) assuming that "fair use" meant we could post any picture. I made the same mistake that many other assumers make. I appreciate you taking the time to explain this to me. A Plumbing I Will Go (talk) 17:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LAFD chief quote

Since that talk page section is now archived, I just wanted to share that my wife just told me about that quote tonight, about he chief who said something about not saving a life. While I haven’t fully looked it up myself, it appears the origins is based on the supposition that the chief was an DEI/woke here, and that question was given based on their presumed lack of physical ability to drag a man out of a burning house. If that is all true, while I find the answer reprehensible, it is not likely for the reasons you suspect. The reality is that most high ranking people in any industry are not fit to perform the duties of a laborer. How many military generals are still up to snuff? Rather their duties are far more administrative and bureaucratic in nature. Most are now well overweight and out of shape, especially because they don’t have the physical routines and requirement of field personnel. I know a good number of fire chiefs (or other overhead) that might give themselves a heart attack getting many of victims out of a burning building. So on one hand, I don’t fault the chief for not being able to perform that duty, nor is that the betray maybe are claiming about their first duty. However, I do think it misrepresents the office and the people they represent. I far better answer would be to be transparent that while they cannot they are honestly never on the front line, but they do ensure that those who are on the front line are physically fit. And… if that is all true… there is little relevance that has to the SoCal fires specifically, but rather just more political posturing and mud slinging to advance one’s position on the topics of these sorts of issues. However, that might have some trivial value in the article about that specific chief, if they have their own article and it can be backed up with multiple reliable sources. TiggerJay (talk) 06:00, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to comment about this on my talk page.

I have decided to stop bringing up things such as this where there is no reliable source.

I think they have been archiving that particular talk page pretty quickly. I thought they were supposed to wait for there to be at least one week with no comments before archiving any section.

Anyway, since they did archive that section, I commend you for coming here to my talk page to point out what you said. That was very decent and kind of you.

I am trying to be less problematic regarding the topics that I bring up. I will stick only to those where I can cite reliable sources.

A Plumbing I Will Go (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it looks like someone changed it to achieve any discussion after 24 hours of no replies, which really is too quickly. I'll see who did that and see why. Sometimes it makes sense for current events where a lot of disruptive questions are posted to get them out of the way if people are not interacting with them, but I generally disagree with that practice because it is can be disruptive to constructive communication. As far as asking questions, I think they are fair, but as you mentioned, ensuring that we have reliable sources is important, and if it ever feels like it might be controversial or being used in an accusatory (or defending such accusations) manner, then I'd suggest finding more than one source, which is also perhaps higher quality than typical. Cheers! TiggerJay (talk) 01:00, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 2025

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:Layer by Layer are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they) ^talk/edits 00:43, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. A Plumbing I Will Go (talk) 01:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]