Talk:Sony Mavica

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Photography

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

First contribution

Well, this is my first contribution to the Wikipedia project. The text needs a lot more improvings, But I think this would be reached through the time.

MaGioZal - 01/16/2004

Unclear

The first paragraph states that the early Mavicas in 1981 recorded onto a 'mini disc'. This is misleading - the media may have been a disc which was mini, but the storage device known as the Mini Disc was not developed until the 1990s. Perhaps this should be clarified to avoid confusion? 82.30.244.126 00:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged accordingly. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected info about first ru:Sony Mavica - russian wikipage is better in this part. ;-) 89.250.7.229 (talk) 22:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minidisc? I have a Verbatim 5.25" floppy disc that Verbatim calls "Minidisc"!!!! That was years before the magneto-optical mini discs we're used to, were invented.--DaveDodgy (talk) 18:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright?

Dear author,

we would like to use the following pictures for a biodiversity handout to train and inform farmers in the field of biodiversity:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Carex_pendula1.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rosa_macrophylla0.jpg

Your name along with a link to the original file and the creative common license will be named in the picture index (sorted by page number and order of pictures).

Although the creative common license does allow the use of the pictures for our purpose, I wanted to make sure you are also fine with us using them.

I would be very grateful if you could give me a short answer.

Kind regards,

Ulrike Harant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uharant (talk • contribs) 06:27, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About those two images

Ruxnor — Rlink2 — 99.74.178.100:I noticed that you've been reverting each other over whether two images uploaded by User:SchuminWeb were uploaded in good faith. Let's take it to the talk page. SchuminWeb has a history of edits on this page that were clearly made in good faith, and he claimed to be the author uploading them as his own work under CC-BY-SA 3.0. However, a Twitter user recently got a copyright claim for using them, and I'm unsure what the WP policy is for dealing with issues like this. --Tathar (talk) 16:42, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the affected Twitter user is User:FooneTuring on here. --Tathar (talk) 16:47, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, interesting and good to know. I just read the Twitter thread. If "Foone" or whoever uploads a better image, OK. But we must always make articles better with each edit, and removing images with no reason and replacement is not the way. Rlink2 (talk) 18:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that the other editors were aware of SchuminWeb's past edits on this page, since I had to dig pretty deep into the edit history to get that information. It is rather unusual for an own-work CC-BY-SA image to be the subject of a copyright claim, and it normally points to bad faith edits on the part of whoever uploaded the image. --Tathar (talk) 20:53, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]