User talk:Hawthorn

Hi there, Hawthorn - it seems I missed your edits in the August rush, so. . . welcome back to WikiFur! :-)

Thanks for your contributions, and let me know if you need any help not already provided. -- 15:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Insect-wings-example.PNG
Hello Hawthorn,

This is in regards to Image:Insect-wings-example.PNG. It has not been tagged with a copyright status. This can be a complicated area, so I can try to help if you need any. The Wikipedia Image use policy may give some background, but it isn't policy here.

To deal with this image, there are a few choices:


 * If you are the copyright holder, release it under a free license, for example:
 * Public domain
 * Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
 * GFDL
 * If you are asserting that this image is usable under fair use, add an appropriate fair use tag. A very basic summary is that fair use is used for commentary, criticism and review on the image when no free image could be used instead. Some fair use tags are:
 * Logos:
 * Covers:
 * Comic panels:
 * If the image is already under a free license, provide information on the license, and tag the image if you can.
 * If you would like the image to be deleted, ask any administrator

To see a list of current copyright tags available on WikiFur, see Category:Image copyright tags If the copyright status is not resolved, the image may be deleted.

Unless you have a question for me specifically, I'd prefer responses on the page for the image. --Rat 08:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
I prefer to think of my edits as well-informed judgement rather than opinion. :) Am I editing wrongly? How do I know what's the 'correct' change to make to a page? Hawthorn (talk) 10:13, 15 December 2014 (EST)


 * No, no, sorry, I didn't infer that the edit was wrong. The images in the article have been the norm over 200+ articles (until new guidelines are implemented); if you feel that they cramp it, they can be resize (I use a 800X600 template to test that they do not take over an user's screen). The selection of the characters removed based on an opinion of notability, specially we don't (currently) implement such on this type articles based can come up a little opinionated.


 * Or incomplete, in the case of the article itself, as it fails to mention, written and drawn media (fan or official), where these characters are sometimes prominent (specially Spitfire). For the moment I can reword and moved these characters to the a new "Supporting/recurring" section.


 * There was no intention to offend or cast in doubt your edits. I should have made the case for revert more self-explanatory. - Spirou (talk) 16:19, 15 December 2014 (EST)