This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Peripitus. I find it problematic that relevant text would be removed because it is a negative story related to the history of privatization of city services because a city employee and an public relations firm for Atlanta want it removed. Someone researching the effects of privatization in their city would find this particular story of note, and given how much of the history page is devoted to that it seems very important to include and not triival. h_lina_k ( talk) 13:30, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Peripitus for informing me that my upload may violate copyright requirements. I know I should've asked first before uploading but I didn't recall seeing anything regarding that online newspaper articles were valid or not. If you want I can show you exactly where I got it from by sending you the link and maybe it might help the situation. My apologies Helping to make Wikipedia better one page at a time. 01:19, 22 June 2014 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulZMarsh ( talk • contribs)
Peripitus. I need assistance for an upload. please contact newleafpictures@hotmail.com Martin Copping — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marvinto77 ( talk • contribs) 17:03, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Peripitus for informing me that my upload may violate copyright requirements. I know I should've asked first before uploading but I didn't recall seeing anything regarding that this was a potential violation. All I wanted to do was just add a picture of the hospital with the new logo to the article since I deleted the picture that was there previously with our old logo. My apologies for Helping to make Wikipedia better one page at a time. 03:40, 28 February 2015 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:|NJBudion]] ( talk • contribs)
Peripitus. I need assistance for an upload. please contact nickjbudion@gmail.com Nick Budion — Preceding unsigned comment added by NJBudion ( talk • contribs) 03:045, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
The article Hagley, Tasmania you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hagley, Tasmania for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ɱ -- Ɱ ( talk) 12:22, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
@ Ɱ: - you are most welcome and thank you for your help with the Hagley article. I am impressed at your ambition in getting the Briarcliff article set all finished.....I started with the Meander Valley Council (16+ articles) but think I'll run out of enthusiasm before the end ! - Peripitus (Talk) 08:46, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
I wanted to report the vandalism of a
> user of Wikipedia ,Alexikoua .I think that he has vandalised the > information about the ethnic groups in Albania by incresing the percentage > of greek population in Albania.I think that it is a clear vandalism and > GREEK NATIONALISM and i wanted your help about this problem. > I wanted you to solve this problem as soon as possibl because i think that > it is not just a vandalism,but a SERIOUS PROBLEM,NATIONALISM. > User:Zakoni. > > > > > P.s: Here is the correct informatoin.Source:ALBANIAN GOVERNMENT. > http://www.instat.gov.al/media/178070/rezultatet_kryesore_t__censusit_t__popullsis__dhe_banesave_2011_n__shqip_ri.pdf > > > This user has used sources that are not in accordance with the rates that > the user has added itself in Wikipedia.In addition most of the sources of > this user belongs to year 2002 or earlier.I wanted you to take > disciplinary action against this user ,Alexikoua.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Hi. That is a conceptual drawing of a building that is not yet constructed. Bwmoll3 ( talk) 09:10, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Peripitus, I added the reason for "No free equivalent" for this image, please review and let me know if it is permissible. Thanks.-- TerryAlex ( talk) 17:04, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, in case you're not already aware of it, a group of Adelaide Wikipedians has been meeting on a monthly basis since April, with the aim of improving the scope and quality of articles on South Australian topics. We meet at UniSA's City West campus, and our 23 July meeting will have a guest speaker from the National Trust of SA.
This coming Sunday, 6 July, we will be holding our first Edit-a-thon. This will be an opportunity for new editors to come and learn either basic or more advanced editing from very experienced wikipedians, so if you know anyone who would like to get some practice, please let them know - and beginners will be very welcome. Cheers, Bahudhara ( talk) 06:10, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Peripitus! my simple question to you is, why you deleted the image before informing me? I would have contested it. CutestPenguin { talk • contribs} 12:01, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
It would be nice if you could you take a look at the PUF backlog. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 21:09, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I only did adding a photo of that singer. not violating. I got that from shihan's agreement from his official facebook page. Not from that youtube page. Remember it.
An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:Hearts XP.png. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 00:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:Ally mcbeal cast 1997 original season 1.jpg. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. George Ho ( talk) 06:06, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Peripitus,
Thank you so much for your help making Briarcliff Manor a Good Article. If you wouldn't mind, I would be very glad if you could write on its FA review. I had to renominate it, the first FA nomination just didn't get enough attention. Any comment you could give would be great, and there's no restriction on who can comment or their level of involvement in writing the article. Here's the link: [1]
Thank you.-- ɱ (talk) 22:21, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 August 16#File:Hearts XP.png. Thanks. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 18:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Peripitus, I'm just wondering, are you in the Hobart area? And do you do meetups? I'm trying to organise a Hobart meetup in late Dec or early Jan. I'm just asking a few of the more active Tasmanian editors first before I lock down a date/time (I've put forward Tasman Quartermasters as a venue as they are nice and casual). Please check the link and put your name down if you are interested! -- Chuq (talk) 13:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello! This is a message to inform you of a Wikipedia Hobart meetup which will be held on 10 January. New and experienced editors are welcome! Please check
the meetup page for more information.
This message has been sent to members of
Category:Wikipedians in Tasmania by
Chuq
(talk) using
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
22:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
There was no consensus to delete that file. I ask that you restore the image. There was discussion of the image. That was not disputed. It's hard to believe that image was there for years ... then one editor decides its gone. -- evrik ( talk) 01:07, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there! I'm responding to the message you left me in regards to the photos I uploaded. I claimed them as my own work, only for the purposes of using them in my sandbox. I was sent them by Studios 301 via email, and given permission to upload them as my own work until such time as I use them on a 'live' page Sharkywoo ( talk) 09:15, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
I won't argue with that interpretation of the 1st rule. I do believe the article should have a graphical representation but until a free one is found I am cool with the image removed and replaced with just text for now. There Is No Me talk 05:47, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
As I understand it, deleting requires consensus, it not reached a consensus, and I had justified, in my view, all negative comments.
So why did you delete it?
Michael ˥ Ǝ Ʉ H Ɔ I Ɯ ( talk) 08:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
a. there is no freely licenced material (other than text). b. when I used text, people deleted it as uncited. c. if it, the text, is deleted, it "significantly" prevents the readers understanding.
While I can't access the discussion now, it was IIRC, three points were raised. 1. size (second poster - other than me) - as I explained, any smaller and you could not read "POLICE" the topic of the text/section. 2. WP:NFCCP #8 & 9, (original nomination)
Anyway, this whole place has turned into a bureaucratic nightmare, I give up, deleting my account, by.... ˥ Ǝ Ʉ H Ɔ I Ɯ ( talk) 09:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear Peripitus,
Could you please undelete this file? There is a valid looking OTRS-ticket releasing the file under a free license.
Regards, Natuur12 ( talk) 20:18, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing Brown County State Park. It was great working with you! TwoScars ( talk) 22:24, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Whitemore, Tasmania you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber ( talk) 09:21, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
The article Whitemore, Tasmania you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Whitemore, Tasmania for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber ( talk) 12:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Your deletion reason makes sense, and I think it should be deleted. I responded to your nomination, so could you possibly respond to my comments there? I look forward to reading your feedback. :) BenLinus 1214 talk 17:17, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello, in advance of a possible project in the Hobart area, we're looking to identify and improve a specific range of articles, mainly those associated with locations in the Hobart City Council region. If you'd like to find out more, please join in the discussion at WikiProject Tasmania, or check out the list of articles at QR list. If you'd prefer to not receive these notifications in the future, please let me know.
This message has been sent to members of Category:Wikipedians in Tasmania, Category:Wikipedians in Hobart, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Tasmania participants by Chuq (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 12:05, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Something went wrong here: [3] DMacks ( talk) 05:19, 1 March 2015 (UTC) @ Dmacks: - That is bizarre. Fixed now thanks. Perhaps the database server needs more coffee - Peripitus (Talk) 06:27, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Dear Peripitus, freely licensed images are used on Wikipedia Commons, not on Wikipedia. So for this reason, i have downloaded the images on Wikipedia. Thus in near future, before deleting any images, you first read the guidelines of Wikipedia and Wikipedia Commons. There are options available on Wikipedia uploading wizard which states that wikipedia accept images of living people taken from websites, or from screenshots or from magazines or many other places and there are certain articles which has images taken from websites, or from screenshots or from magazines, which is also not deleted. User:Vivaan Viswanath ( talk) 03:48, 3 March 2015
Hi,
I still have some doubt if this file should have been deleted. You state that deletion was executed because of the following reasons: NFCC#8 and NFCC#1.
If we look further:
I like to ask you kindly to reconsider your verdict.
Regards,
_/)_/)_/) ˷˷˷˷˷˷˷˷ _/) NED33 talk 14:55, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I don't get why you've deleted
File:UAEU Reem_Al Marzouqi.png as F7 "invalid fair-use claim". What's the problem in the non-free use rationale? One problem I'm aware of, I can't read the text in the source from the Emirate university, the photo could be actually free instead of only fair use. –
Be..anyone (
talk)
11:21, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Update:
undeletion requested, the image tag bot assumes that the uploader has two or even seven days to fix the issue, an immediate F7 deletion for a given {{
non-free use rationale}} can't be as it should be. –
Be..anyone (
talk)
12:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:36, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Still having trouble understanding this free thing. http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/about shows free images of all the current SNL cast members so would http://www.nbc.com/sites/nbcunbc/files/files/styles/nbc_person_teaser/public/images/2014/10/31/leslie_jones_1050x1050.jpg qualify as a free image since it is displayed there and this isn't a pay-site? Ranze ( talk) 11:53, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Could you please be specific as to why you deleted the photo? There was no delete votes. On the contrary, I argued for it to remain and threw in a keep vote. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 16:40, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
@ Jonas Vinther:. Because you failed to give a policy related reason why the image should be kept. Stephan nominated the image on the basis of NFCC#8. To dispute this you need to show (a) that the image significantly increases reader's understanding of the topic that its removal would be detrimental to said understanding. Your response that the image "helps" reader's understand did not, in my view, address the nomination point. The fact that there was zero sourced commentary of the image is usually in these debates, and was in this case, a strong point in favour of the image failing NFCC#8. If reliable sources cannot be found that discuss that image used in that way, it is usually unsupportable to claim that it is required here - Peripitus (Talk) 23:01, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Why did you delete File:H.Gangaram Nizamabad.jpg ? This image was entirely uploaded by me.Is there any way of getting that file back ?-- Rizwanmahai ( talk) 13:55, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
I want you to have a look at this article, Nanded.Just have alook at the Educational section,they have written almost all the name of colleges and schools in their town.-- Rizwanmahai ( talk) 13:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Ok. -- Rizwanmahai ( talk) 14:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
The article Meander, Tasmania you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Meander, Tasmania for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jakec -- Jakec ( talk) 20:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
There is no need to say sorry for deleting the photograph, if its wrong to upload that photo, its right to delete it.
Secondly, need your advice for this photo, /info/en/?search=File:Sukumar_Sen.jpg, it has 3 copyright templates. Can it be used? and can it be cropped for the article Sukumar Sen?
Karan Kamath ( talk · contribs)
File:Child actress Hadley Delany.gif. Cheers in advance. Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 11:46, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
The image I added has a very generous license for non-Commercial use. It's frustrating that the Wikipedia image upload system is poorly matched for use with Creative Commons licenses.
Ilnyckyj ( talk) 16:25, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
"The best way is to take a picture yourself...then you can declare it to be as free as you like, including being free enough for WP use."
This is exactly what I did. I took this picture and released it under a Creative Commons license: /info/en/?search=File:Hugh_Segal,_Master_of_Massey_College.jpg
It's much better than this picture, which seems specifically chosen to make the subject look bad: /info/en/?search=File:Hugh_Segal_%28cropped%29.jpg
So can I put my photo back in this article?
Ilnyckyj ( talk) 19:39, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but this argument really isn't convincing. You're saying that I need to allow the free use of the photo by anyone in any circumstance, including for their profit, or it can't be part of a Wikipedia page? This seems to be a matter of personal ideology about copyright, rather than about whether the image is legally suitable for inclusion on this page. I have a detailed usage guide for my photography which specifically covers how non-commercial use, like a Wikipedia page, is free: http://www.sindark.com/NonBlog/milan-ilnyckyj-photo-0-5.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilnyckyj ( talk • contribs) 00:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Please why are you just deleting everything I contributed? You just deleted all my files which some I took with my own camera. The page you claimed I copied image for Nafisa Abdullahi, I have the file since 2013 before they upload it. Then what of my 5 other files? Tell me where I copied them? I have been editing wikipedia anynomously since 2012, I just decided to register in 2015 to contribute more but you're just unkind. Ammarpad 17:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ammarpad ( talk • contribs)
File:Members of the 1st SS Panzer Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler standing at attention at Hitler's private mountain retreat, the "Berghof".gif. Is replaceable with free media. Cheers in advance. Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 12:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Peripitus, I am sending you this message because you are one of the admins, OTRS volunteers, or other editors who regularly deals with image issues. I would like to propose that we move to monthly {{ OTRS pending}} and {{ OTRS received}} categories and that we have a bot help out with automatically tagging images for deletion where the tag has been in place longer than the current {{ OTRS backlog}}. The purpose of this exercise is twofold: (1) it reduces potential duplication of effort in checking on images and (2) it prevents images for which we do not receive appropriate permission from sitting around longer than need be. My idea is at Wikipedia:OTRS_noticeboard#Proposal to move to dated pending and received categories and I would welcome your input. Thanks, -- B ( talk) 12:47, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
A Very Good Day to You !!
So, in English, what does this mean? Eventually I'll be uploading a few more files from people who are sending me files, so I'll need to know the proper way/steps for uploading to satisfy the criteria. As to this file, I did receive permission from Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston. I still have the email if you want me to forward it to you. Roberto221 ( talk) 23:18, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for notifying as I am still new to uploading photos on Wikipedia, really appreciate your advice. Good day!! Silaslej ( talk) 12:40, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello! A few months ago, you closed this discussion as delete, but my comment appears to have been ignored. The proposer stated that it was a second album cover, but such statement is false, because the deleted file was actually used to illustrate the infobox of a single from that album. Is it possible to review that deletion? Thank you, Victão Lopes Fala! 19:12, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
hi, KSI posted on twitter that can anyone change the pic because the previous one is Sh*t. so i found this pic on google and changed. could you help me choose what licence i choose Immu 01 ( talk) 10:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Hey Perpitius Rabtman here, thanks for letting me know about the picture, I thought it would be better to ask you about one quick question I had. So If i showed some permission i got from the author of the image himself, would i be able to keep the image? -Thanks, Rabt man ( talk) 22:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
So how should I obtain the free license from the copyright holder? Is there some kind of purpose or can i just ask? Sorry about the confusion and thanks for the help. Rabt man ( talk) 01:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. If I read the logs correctly, you deleted File:Patience Kpobi.jpg and warned User:011nyegagh about it. That warning had no effect as the editor uploaded a copyrighted image under that same file name pretty much right after you deleted it. -- Whpq ( talk) 02:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey Perpitius, I had sent an email to the Stanford University contact page, and I may have done the file upload wizard wrong, so is there a chance if I will be able to re-do the questions on the file upload wizard to the extent where it is more accurate? Thanks Rabt man ( talk) 18:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey Peripitus, can u please delete that image? I dont think I filed the image correctly. Thanks Rabt man ( talk) 01:41, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
HI You can delete the empty page https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leila_Maknoun thanks !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Popezo ( talk • contribs) 15:08, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
@ Peripitus no i mean that's it can disepear that page completly !!
This file is a free work. Although its owner gave it to me but there is no such copyright associated with it. Hence, he can not send me the permission too. Therefore he only told me to reupload it with changed attribution. Can you please help me what to do now? Nameishidden ( talk) 13:28, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Ok he's alive. Understood. Sorry about that. Connor7617 ( talk) 11:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
You should have received an email with a link to a Google form to complete - could you please either do so or email me if you did not receive it? Note that, because there are more applicants than available accounts, not responding could result in your slot being passed to a waiting editor. Nikkimaria ( talk) 17:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
I would like to use your pic in a book I am writing. May I? and how do I give credit? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.208.16.189 ( talk) 14:35, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
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)
13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to remove this file I uploaded as it is no longer needed. Please delete. MrBean65 ( talk) /info/en/?search=File:Jonah_Bryson-Profile.jpg
This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.
I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information, and specifically to the OTRS system.
As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.
An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.
The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information by way of the OTRS system and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access.
Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign
If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.
If you wish to stop receiving these notices, you may remove yourself from this list. Please note that doing so will not prevent you from losing OTRS rights and access after the 31 December 2015 deadline.
Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (
User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation
Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery, 06:23, 22 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to other languages. • Help
This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.
I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information, and specifically to the OTRS system.
As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.
An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.
The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information by way of the OTRS system and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access.
Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign
If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.
If you wish to stop receiving these notices, you may remove yourself from this list. Please note that doing so will not prevent you from losing OTRS rights and access after the 31 December 2015 deadline.
Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (
User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation
Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery, 20:07, 26 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to other languages. • Help
This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.
I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information, and specifically to the OTRS system.
As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.
An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.
The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information by way of the OTRS system and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access.
Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign
Even if you have signed the confidentiality agreement for functionaries (general agreement), you must also sign the OTRS agreement to retain your OTRS access.
If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.
If you wish to stop receiving these notices, you may remove yourself from this list. Please note that doing so will not prevent you from losing OTRS rights and access after the 31 December 2015 deadline.
Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (
User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation
Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery, 21:48, 27 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to other languages. • Help
This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.
I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information, and specifically to the OTRS system.
As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.
An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.
The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information by way of the OTRS system and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access.
Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign
Even if you have signed the confidentiality agreement for functionaries (general agreement), you must also sign the OTRS agreement to retain your OTRS access.
If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.
If you wish to stop receiving these notices, you may remove yourself from this list. Please note that doing so will not prevent you from losing OTRS rights and access after the 31 December 2015 deadline.
Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (
User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation
Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery, 08:39, 30 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to other languages. • Help
This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.
I wanted to send one final follow-up on a message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information, and specifically to the OTRS system.
As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.
An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.
The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information by way of the OTRS system and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access.
Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign
Even if you have signed the confidentiality agreement for functionaries (general agreement), you must also sign the OTRS agreement to retain your OTRS access.
If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.
If you wish to stop receiving these notices, you may remove yourself from this list. Please note that doing so will not prevent you from losing OTRS rights and access after the 31 December 2015 deadline.
Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (
User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation
Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery, 09:31, 31 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to other languages. • Help