[WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

George William Herbert
For your consideration and consternation...

Is it:
A) Ilegal
B) Immoral
C) Fattening

...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
erased that section of the image with photoshop)...

Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
over again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Q_clearance&action=history

--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

David Gerard-2
On 07/02/07, George Herbert <[hidden email]> wrote:

> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
> is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
> Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
> photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
> government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
> erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
> over again.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Q_clearance&action=history


Block the range. Let us know so I can let the comcom know too.


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

Jake Nelson-3
In reply to this post by George William Herbert
Generally speaking, anyone who leaves an edit summary of "You're
breaking the law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (sic) is probably not someone with
legitimate authority. 18 exclamation points does not a legal point make.

-- Jake Nelson

George Herbert wrote:

> For your consideration and consternation...
>
> Is it:
> A) Ilegal
> B) Immoral
> C) Fattening
>
> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
> is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
> Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
> photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
> government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
> erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
>
> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
> over again.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Q_clearance&action=history
>


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

Andrew Gray
In reply to this post by George William Herbert
On 07/02/07, George Herbert <[hidden email]> wrote:

> For your consideration and consternation...
>
> Is it:
> A) Ilegal
> B) Immoral
> C) Fattening
>
> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
> is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
> Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
> photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
> government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
> erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
>
> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
> over again.

I am reminded of a nice chap, editing from somewhere deep in *.mil,
who kept trying to remove a map of the Green Zone, citing "operational
security" reasons. The fact that we had obtained the map from the
website of a US Congressman didn't seem to faze him...

(On examination, that claim boiled down to the user not understanding
that a rule which said *he* couldn't talk about something didn't have
to apply to everyone else)

In this case... if there is a legal issue, please direct him to Brad
and ask him to cite chapter and verse.

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

George William Herbert
On 2/7/07, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 07/02/07, George Herbert <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > For your consideration and consternation...
> >
> > Is it:
> > A) Ilegal
> > B) Immoral
> > C) Fattening
> >
> > ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
> > staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
> > came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
> > badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
> > is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
> > Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
> > photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
> > government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
> > erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
> >
> > Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
> > and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
> > what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
> > have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
> > over again.
>
> I am reminded of a nice chap, editing from somewhere deep in *.mil,
> who kept trying to remove a map of the Green Zone, citing "operational
> security" reasons. The fact that we had obtained the map from the
> website of a US Congressman didn't seem to faze him...
>
> (On examination, that claim boiled down to the user not understanding
> that a rule which said *he* couldn't talk about something didn't have
> to apply to everyone else)
>
> In this case... if there is a legal issue, please direct him to Brad
> and ask him to cite chapter and verse.

Can someone ensure that Brad is aware of this and doesn't get
blindsided by a call from someone at the Department of Energy raising
random threats of government security stuff?

Thanks...


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

Parker Peters-2
In reply to this post by George William Herbert
If the image is clear enough that it could conceivably be used as an aid to
falsified badges, then there is probably a problem.

And I'd add that until we have better information, it'd probably be better
to remove it and err on the side of caution.

Parker

On 2/7/07, George Herbert <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> For your consideration and consternation...
>
> Is it:
> A) Ilegal
> B) Immoral
> C) Fattening
>
> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
> is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
> Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
> photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
> government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
> erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
>
> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
> over again.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Q_clearance&action=history
>
> --
> -george william herbert
> [hidden email]
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

fredbaud
In reply to this post by George William Herbert

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andrew Gray [mailto:[hidden email]]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 02:23 PM
>To: 'English Wikipedia'
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...
>
>On 07/02/07, George Herbert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> For your consideration and consternation...
>>
>> Is it:
>> A) Ilegal
>> B) Immoral
>> C) Fattening
>>
>> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
>> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
>> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
>> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
>> is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
>> Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
>> photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
>> government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
>> erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
>>
>> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
>> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
>> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
>> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
>> over again.
>
>I am reminded of a nice chap, editing from somewhere deep in *.mil,
>who kept trying to remove a map of the Green Zone, citing "operational
>security" reasons. The fact that we had obtained the map from the
>website of a US Congressman didn't seem to faze him...
>
>(On examination, that claim boiled down to the user not understanding
>that a rule which said *he* couldn't talk about something didn't have
>to apply to everyone else)
>
>In this case... if there is a legal issue, please direct him to Brad
>and ask him to cite chapter and verse.
>
>--
>- Andrew Gray
>  [hidden email]

Done

Fred



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

fredbaud
In reply to this post by George William Herbert

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Fred Bauder [mailto:[hidden email]]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 02:53 PM
>To: 'English Wikipedia', 'English Wikipedia'
>Cc: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Andrew Gray [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 02:23 PM
>>To: 'English Wikipedia'
>>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...
>>
>>On 07/02/07, George Herbert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> For your consideration and consternation...
>>>
>>> Is it:
>>> A) Ilegal
>>> B) Immoral
>>> C) Fattening
>>>
>>> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
>>> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
>>> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
>>> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
>>> is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
>>> Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
>>> photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
>>> government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
>>> erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
>>>
>>> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
>>> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
>>> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
>>> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
>>> over again.
>>
>>I am reminded of a nice chap, editing from somewhere deep in *.mil,
>>who kept trying to remove a map of the Green Zone, citing "operational
>>security" reasons. The fact that we had obtained the map from the
>>website of a US Congressman didn't seem to faze him...
>>
>>(On examination, that claim boiled down to the user not understanding
>>that a rule which said *he* couldn't talk about something didn't have
>>to apply to everyone else)
>>
>>In this case... if there is a legal issue, please direct him to Brad
>>and ask him to cite chapter and verse.
>>
>>--
>>- Andrew Gray
>>  [hidden email]
>
>Done
>
>Fred

Well, No I did not refer him to Brad, but gave Brad a heads up. There is a chance that there is such a law, after all, and it is a public relations problem at any event.

Fred



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

Brad Patrick-2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

/me pops his head up

Fred Bauder wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Fred Bauder [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 02:53 PM
>> To: 'English Wikipedia', 'English Wikipedia'
>> Cc: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andrew Gray [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 02:23 PM
>>> To: 'English Wikipedia'
>>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...
>>>
>>> On 07/02/07, George Herbert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> For your consideration and consternation...
>>>>
>>>> Is it:
>>>> A) Ilegal
>>>> B) Immoral
>>>> C) Fattening
>>>>
>>>> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
>>>> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
>>>> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
>>>> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
>>>> is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
>>>> Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
>>>> photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
>>>> government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
>>>> erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
>>>>
>>>> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
>>>> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
>>>> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
>>>> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
>>>> over again.
>>> I am reminded of a nice chap, editing from somewhere deep in *.mil,
>>> who kept trying to remove a map of the Green Zone, citing "operational
>>> security" reasons. The fact that we had obtained the map from the
>>> website of a US Congressman didn't seem to faze him...
>>>
>>> (On examination, that claim boiled down to the user not understanding
>>> that a rule which said *he* couldn't talk about something didn't have
>>> to apply to everyone else)
>>>
>>> In this case... if there is a legal issue, please direct him to Brad
>>> and ask him to cite chapter and verse.
>>>
>>> --
>>> - Andrew Gray
>>>  [hidden email]
>> Done
>>
>> Fred
>
> Well, No I did not refer him to Brad, but gave Brad a heads up. There is a chance that there is such a law, after all, and it is a public relations problem at any event.
>
> Fred
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFylIz5txwQhyxnbIRAkpoAJ99NOO0uXT+WXkoDz1/E2gm4VJruACggl5Y
7Nqcdvfftkytf4CUMYH9/KQ=
=Nz49
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

Stan Shebs-2
In reply to this post by George William Herbert
George Herbert wrote:
> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
> over again.
>  
I really really hope my large number of tax dollars is not paying the
salary of this lamer...

Stan


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

George William Herbert
In reply to this post by Brad Patrick-2
On 2/7/07, Brad Patrick <[hidden email]> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> /me pops his head up
>
> Fred Bauder wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Fred Bauder [mailto:[hidden email]]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 02:53 PM
> >> To: 'English Wikipedia', 'English Wikipedia'
> >> Cc: [hidden email]
> >> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Andrew Gray [mailto:[hidden email]]
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 02:23 PM
> >>> To: 'English Wikipedia'
> >>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...
> >>>
> >>> On 07/02/07, George Herbert <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>> For your consideration and consternation...
> >>>>
> >>>> Is it:
> >>>> A) Ilegal
> >>>> B) Immoral
> >>>> C) Fattening
> >>>>
> >>>> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
> >>>> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
> >>>> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
> >>>> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
> >>>> is that it's illegal to show the badge, despite the fact that Linton
> >>>> Brooks wore it in public all the time, there are numerous public press
> >>>> photos of it, and that the image in question came from an unclassified
> >>>> government press image freely released (though, they subsequently
> >>>> erased that section of the image with photoshop)...
> >>>>
> >>>> Several of us have asked the people removing it to identify themselves
> >>>> and explain whether the image was subsequently classified or tell us
> >>>> what law prevents us from legally hosting it, if there is one, and
> >>>> have heard nothing back.  All they are doing is deleting it over and
> >>>> over again.
> >>> I am reminded of a nice chap, editing from somewhere deep in *.mil,
> >>> who kept trying to remove a map of the Green Zone, citing "operational
> >>> security" reasons. The fact that we had obtained the map from the
> >>> website of a US Congressman didn't seem to faze him...
> >>>
> >>> (On examination, that claim boiled down to the user not understanding
> >>> that a rule which said *he* couldn't talk about something didn't have
> >>> to apply to everyone else)
> >>>
> >>> In this case... if there is a legal issue, please direct him to Brad
> >>> and ask him to cite chapter and verse.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> - Andrew Gray
> >>>  [hidden email]
> >> Done
> >>
> >> Fred
> >
> > Well, No I did not refer him to Brad, but gave Brad a heads up. There is a chance that there is such a law, after all, and it is a public relations problem at any event.

Hey Brad... If you can take a look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:205.254.147.8

...when you get a sec, that's the second and more persistent of the
two anon editors in question.  I pointed them at the Foundation
contact page and to talk to you; you can change that if you want.


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

Alphax (Wikipedia email)
In reply to this post by George William Herbert
George Herbert wrote:

> For your consideration and consternation...
>
> Is it:
> A) Ilegal
> B) Immoral
> C) Fattening
>
> ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
> staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
> came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
> badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
> is that it's illegal to show the badge,
/me goes to get a copy and put it up at http://thisimageisillegal.ytmnd.com/

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

signature.asc (554 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

George William Herbert
On 2/7/07, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <[hidden email]> wrote:

> George Herbert wrote:
> > For your consideration and consternation...
> >
> > Is it:
> > A) Ilegal
> > B) Immoral
> > C) Fattening
> >
> > ...if US Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Agency
> > staffers remove an image repeatedly from a Wikipedia article, which
> > came from a Department of Energy press photo, showing the Q clearance
> > badge of the now-former head of NNSA.  The claimed reason for deletion
> > is that it's illegal to show the badge,
>
> /me goes to get a copy and put it up at http://thisimageisillegal.ytmnd.com/

Not needed, the Internet Archive has a copy of the original already...


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] For your consternation...

Sean Barrett-3
In reply to this post by Parker Peters-2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Parker Peters stated for the record:
> If the image is clear enough that it could conceivably be used as an aid to
> falsified badges, then there is probably a problem.
>
> And I'd add that until we have better information, it'd probably be better
> to remove it and err on the side of caution.
>
> Parker

Take care of that for us, will you?

- --
 Sean Barrett     | My wife says I should get up and go to
 [hidden email] | work, but the voices in my head say
                  | I should stay home and clean my guns.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFyy6d/SVOiq2uhHMRAmC6AJ0UPG+ZUUxZTy2Oo990Aw1BD2zhgACgx94e
t1AUSwZ9obGi6DIXuaNvCK4=
=kq87
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l