I think you should not play on words if you were
fair.
A year ago, fair use was authorized, with no mention if it was
authorized in the encyclopedic content or in the user page.
Amongst the two untaggued pages listed above, one was a picture of my
daughter and labelled as such. It was clearly not meant for encyclopedic
space.
Besides, see the message just below as well :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anthere/box#Image_tagging
It says
P.P.S. I hope all is well with you, and that you are enjoying your
labors with Angela and Jimbo. :)
Looking here, I'd like to add that the following images need tags:
▪ Image:Acacia.JPG
▪ Image:Dessication.JPG
▪ Image:SablePlante.JPG
▪ Image:Hoggar.JPG
▪ Image:Hoggar2.JPG
▪ Image:Hoggar5.JPG
▪ Image:Oasis.JPG
▪ Image:Sahara3.JPG
▪ Image:Sahara5.JPG
Any more tags would be a great help. Thanks!
--[[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682 (talk)]] 08:11, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
Does that look like an automated message ? The P.P.S. ?
Look, I find the general behavior which consist in saying to an editor
"you are allowed to do that", then a year later, to rudely delete work
without warning, upon the reason it is no more allowed now to do that, a
bit difficult to admit.
But I find the behavior which consist one year later to deny that what
was done a year before, was authorized at that time, much more difficult
to admit. Fair use was authorized a year ago. Period.
I think what you are arguing is something different to quite a lot of
others. They are saying why the policy was necessary. Your complaint
is actually that you weren't warned. I don't think anyone would
disagree that you should have been notified before the deletions took
place.
--
Sam