User talk:Jawed

Untitled

Your photograph of Skyline is beautiful. Nice job. Andy M. 21:40, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I came to day just the same thing! I've nominated both Skyline photos on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. You might also like to consider adding yourself to Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. Say, what software did you use to stitch together the images (surely not the hair-pullingly frustrating PanoTools)? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 11:16, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I agree, not to mention the Washington DC panorama on your site... BTW, On the paypal article, your comment about proper English is a bit off - if the substance of the edit is valid, then it should simply be cleaned up. We have plenty of people from the Middle East, Asia, the US, and the UK who couldnt 'write English good' to save their lives. We dont want to prejudicially ostracise them for something as simple as spelling and grammar. ;) -Stevertigo 22:25, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Beslan hostage crisis

I understand your reasons for removing the word "terrorists" from Beslan hostage crisis, but there is a delicate truce on the talk page about this matter, and it has been agreed that for now things will be left as they are: one mention of terrorism in the introduction, and "hostage-takers" used in the rest of the article. I have reverted your edit, and if you disagree or want to know more I would ask you to read everything said so far on Talk:Beslan hostage crisis. As it happens I have been the main proponent of the use of neutral terms in the article, and I think the word "terrorist" is inherently POV, but I want to preserve good relations amongst contributors and the current situation is doing that well. Thank you for your understanding. — Trilobite (Talk) 02:26, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Stanford

I am, indeed, serious. :) Hope the Stanfords wouldn't mind. Thanks for the great pix of the Church and so on. Good work! jengod 19:53, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. Did you know you can sign your posts with either three or four tildes depending on whether you want a datestamp? ~~~~ [like so] jengod 19:55, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Zak article

I removed it because walkthroughs for games are very unencyclopedic. The article should be about the game, describing the plot, its influences and such things. An external link to a walkthrough would be ok, though. --Conti|✉ 20:29, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

There is, however, a wikibook for just this purpose. -- John Fader

Chihuahua/Great Dane

I responded to your question on my talk page. Why were you asking? Elf | Talk 22:42, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Pic of the day

Hi Humpty,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:San Francisco Bay Area Skyline Blvd2.jpg is due to make a reappearance as Pic of the Day on the 22nd June. I've used the same caption as last time, but you can make any changes at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/June 22, 2005. -- Solipsist 07:52, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image:Apollo_15_Space_Suit_James_Irwin.jpg

Hi. I just thought I let you know that I have uploaded this image of your to Commons. I did a huge rewrite of the Apollo 15 article and have been creating a nice picture gallery Commons:Apollo 15 at the same time and thought your image was a nice addition. I noticed that your photo of Dave Scott's space suit was already there. Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:18, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

You may also want to upload the high res version of Image:Apollo 15 Space Suit David Scott.jpg to commons:Image:Apollo 15 Space Suit David Scott.jpg. Evil Monkey∴Hello 02:31, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day

Hi Jawed,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Apollo 15 Space Suit David Scott.jpg is due to make a reappearance as Pic of the Day on the 8th August. I've made some small changes to the previous caption, but you can make any alterations at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/August 8, 2005. -- Solipsist 20:53, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On Rankings

Noticed you seem to have an aversion to rankings, given that they are encyclopedic, what is your beef with them? TheChief (PowWow) 17:47, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's very simple. There are many rankings out there, and I've noticed that people always pick the rankings that present their schools in the best light. Alumni of a certain school seem to have no problem including a high ranking in their article, but they complain if you put an equally valid ranking in there that places the school lower. To me that makes including rankings in the first place pointless. Furthermore, I do think that those rankings are very, very arbitrary and don't actually tell you very much about the school. Jawed 19:54, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While I'll agree schools ought to bear all rankings which are widely recognized (and thus notable), I don't think you can make the decision that "those rankings are very, very arbitrary and don't actually tell you very much about the school". Rankings in general tell you how the school is viewed, and to a large degree what kind of education one can expect from the school, and what kind of graduates the school produces. I'll agree to some degree there is an amount of fuzzyness to the ratings. I'd hire an undergrad from Berkeley (ranked 21st by USNews) well before I'd hire a graduate from Harvard (ranked 1st), but there is little argument that when compared with Miami University(ranked 62nd) both schools are a good deal better, and in general they are better even than a graduate from the University of Virginia.

So yes, rankings to some degree are arbitrary, but I wouldn't say they are very arbitrary. The top ranks are clustered pretty tightly, but a low ranked school (below 50 or so, and to a greater degree below 100) on the USNews rankings will offer a different quality of education than the high ranked schools. This is even more true in graduate rankings where the top schools are the top 10 or 20, with anything less being more or less unfit for serious doctoral work.

As an encyclopedia we're expected to present such information. However in dealing with the NPOV stance, we should also report the world rankings. In fact, the world rankings are highly compatible with the USNews rankings in many ways. An important point to remember is also that rankings, especially USNews, are so popular they become a self fulfilling prophecy. Good students want to go to good schools, so if a school is consistantly ranked high, it will attract the best students. Just my thoughts on the matter, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on the subject. I'd also propose we think about a WikiProject to ensure NPOV in rankings, and to list all rankings a school recieves from major ranking bodies (though we need to discuss how to do this without displaying so much information that it becomes difficult to peruse). As a note, I monitor all talk pages which I comment on, and will see if you reply here. TheChief (PowWow) 20:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Image:Mk davis pgf.gif

An image that you uploaded, Image:Mk davis pgf.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

android 79 01:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:165 University Ave., Palo Alto, California.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:165 University Ave., Palo Alto, California.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 21:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi Jawed,

My name is Fernanda Viégas and I have been studying Wikipedia for a while now (you can see a paper I published on the subject here). I would like to ask you a few questions about your activities as a Wikipedia image creator. I am fascinated by the pictorial side of Wikipedia and it would be great to hear about this community from one of its members. Would you be available to participate an email survey this week? Thanks, — Fernanda 03:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC) | talk[reply]

Hi again, Jawed. I have started sending out the questionnaire to participants in the study and it would be great if you could participate too. If you'd like to get in touch with me via email, please use the "Email this user" feature on my page. Thanks! — Fernanda 21:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC) | talk[reply]

Fuqua pronounciation

Someone deleted your comment on the Fuqua School of Business talk page, but just FYI, the name doesn't sound like "fuck" at all; it's pronounced fyoo-kwa. 卫weizhe哲 23:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're so fast!

Wow, that was like two seconds ago. Jeez. And it's your fault I got addicted to Wikipedia in the first place! Hope your Wikipedia addiction isn't tearing you away from work too much. ;) --Che Fox 05:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you

See response on Duke University's talk page. -Bluedog423^Talk 05:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dad's Puzzle.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Dad's Puzzle.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 09:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Madison Square Garden

Hi, since you have written on the Madison Square Garden Talk page before, I want to know if you can comment on the current debate on whether a sentence I wrote, about WWE blocking WCW from ever having a show in the garden, belongs in the article. My opinion is that the fact is as important to MSG history as it was to the WWE. Milchama 10:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Larry Ellison Hotdog.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Larry Ellison Hotdog.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 00:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

This is the best way I know how to reach you, so:

Congratulations, man. Seriously. Wow. --Che Fox 23:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IMG 1028-IMG 1033 enblended.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMG 1028-IMG 1033 enblended.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 01:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IMG 1788.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMG 1788.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you.

Image:Cox Bazaar Fishermen.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cox Bazaar Fishermen.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you.

hawaii pano...

nice pano of the ranch in hawaii... --MattWright (talk) 21:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Franz Josef Strauss.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Franz Josef Strauss.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 12:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Waterstrider.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Waterstrider.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:Stanford Mausoleum.jpg

File:Stanford Mausoleum.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Stanford Mausoleum.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Stanford Mausoleum.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 06:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stanford Memorial Church.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Stanford Memorial Church.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 07:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:University Avenue at the Circle with train steaming toward El Palo Alto, 1894.jpg is now available as Commons:File:University Avenue at the Circle with train steaming toward El Palo Alto, 1894.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jawed there is a person who is continously pushing his pov

pls see ur discussion page and you will understand how this user tarikur is pushing his own pov. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.180.230.185 (talk) 08:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elvis has left the building for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Elvis has left the building, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elvis has left the building until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 05:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FPC delisting discussion

Just wanted to let you know, two of your images are currently being discussed for delisting at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/San Francisco Bay Area Skyline Blvd. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:21, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: YouTube comment

Can you confirm that you were the one who posted the "why the fuck" comment on your YouTube channel in reaction to the G+ integration? Some speculated that your account may have been compromised. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:51, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You Stole My Photo. You are in violation of US Copyright Laws.

I created and own the copyright of the photo of you and the other two founders of You Tube. I shot the photo for USA Today and have transferred NO rights to you. You are in violation of US Copyright Law. In addition the image has been registered. I think you know what that means. Please remove from Wikipedia immediately. Seriously, you should know better. Go get your own photos.

Martin Klimek martin@klimekphoto.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.50.57 (talk) 20:04, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@69.181.50.57: Chances are you're a troll, but I'm gonna assume good faith and respond to your comment, even though I am not User:Jawed. The file File:Jawed Karim 2008.jpg was uploaded by User:Jawed and taken by Robin Brown in 2008, and has since been released into the public domain by Jawed. You're also claiming ownership of the files File:YouTube TaiwanVersionLaunch SteveChen-1.jpg and File:Chad Hurley -World Economic Forum Annual Meeting Davos 2007.jpg, which were taken by an unknown source and World Economic Forum, respectively. The Steve Chen photo has been released into the public domain as well. The Chad Hurley photo was published onto Flickr under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license, which, if you were the actual author of all 3 images, you'd know this. Finally, File:Youtube founders.jpg is a mashup of all the other photos, which all allow derivative works, thus, it is able to be released under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please claim your upload(s): File:Gemini 4 Inside National Air and Space Museum.JPG

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{Media by uploader}} or {{Presumed self}} tag(s) if present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transferred to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:50, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please claim your upload(s): File:Gemini 4 Outside National Air and Space Museum.JPG

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{Media by uploader}} or {{Presumed self}} tag(s) if present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transferred to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:50, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced image

Hello. On the off chance that you're still running around: there was an image you uploaded a long time ago: File:Minaret Samarra Iraq.jpg. The image was deleted as unsourced, possibly without informing you.[1].

Meanwhile, there is another image based on your upload which is in danger of deletion: File:Minaret Samarra Iraq de-militarized.jpg.

I've since used all sorts of newfangled technology like Google Images but I can't find it. By any chance do you remember where you got it?

Thanks. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:27, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Jawed. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]