User talk:Art Scholar
Welcome!
Hello, Art Scholar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
Here are a few more good links to help you get started:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! DS 17:50, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Wesley Kimler Article Formatting
[edit]Hello, I did a little work to format your article on Wesley Kimler a little closer to the style found on most wikipedia articles. I'm not as familiar with art articles as I should be, so you might wish to rename some of the section titles to be a little more fitting, or even rearrange it a little. If you want any suggestions or have any questions about it, just let me know. ~ Falls End (T, C) 16:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi! Nice format changes. I'll try to learn from that and do so in the future. For instance I also did a shorter piece on Mark Staff Brandl. I need to expand it and add headings as you did. Your idea is great. I just need to adjust a few terms (expositions is not used --- in art "exhibitions" is the term). Thanks a lot! Art Scholar 19:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- Nice job with the other article. If you haven't seen it before take a look through the Wikipedia:Tutorial it'll give a good overview of the things you can do to make articles look good. And of course, it you have any questions or want points just let me know on my talk page. Happy Editing! ~ Falls End (T, C) 17:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I have been back to the Wesley Kimler article recently, because someone (unregistered and unnamed) repeatedly attempts to add childish, silly criticism. He is a controversial artist, so this is one of his enemies, undoubtedly. I tried to make a new section "Controversy" to include the stuff in a more scholarly way, but this might just be a "flaming" issue.
I hope to do some more living American artists as I find time.
By the way, that "Someone" I mentioned above appears to someone named Michael Bulka (he does not use his name, just his Comp. No. appears, 71.201.47.248), who keeps adding in sly insults to the page. As he is a very minor, essentially unknown critic, quotes himself, and has a person problem with Kimler, I think this address may need to be blocked. I have to keep eliminating things and I wish to get on to other artists.
Replaceable fair use Image:Homerin.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Homerin.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell (talk) (random) 19:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Quadell! Thanks for checking. There is, however, no problem with the Homerin image, as he himself supplied it to me and it is the one that his university uses in press releases and so on, and is intended for use such as Wikipedia. Art Scholar
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jets pekin.jpeg
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Jets pekin.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use Image:Markstaffbrandl.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Markstaffbrandl.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the media description page and edit it to add
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 22:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Guide to referencing
[edit]Click on "show" on the right of the orange bar to open contents.
| Using references (citations) |
|---|
|
I thought you might find it useful to have some information about references (refs) on wikipedia. These are important to validate your writing and inform the reader. Any editor can remove unreferenced material; and unsubstantiated articles may end up getting deleted, so when you add something to an article, it's highly advisable to also include a reference to say where it came from. Referencing may look daunting, but it's easy enough to do. Here's a guide to getting started.
A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text. To validate "Mike Brown climbed Everest", it's no good linking to a page about Everest, if Mike Brown isn't mentioned, nor to one on Mike Brown, if it doesn't say that he climbed Everest. You have to link to a source that proves his achievement is true. You must use reliable sources, such as published books, mainstream press, and authorised web sites. Blogs, Myspace, Youtube, fan sites and extreme minority texts are not usually acceptable, nor is original research (e.g. your own unpublished, or self-published, essay or research), or another wikipedia article.
The first thing you have to do is to create a "Notes and references" section (unless it already exists). This goes towards the bottom of the page, below the "See also" section and above the "External links" section. Enter this code:
The next step is to put a reference in the text. Here is the code to do that. It goes at the end of the relevant term, phrase, sentence, or paragraph to which the note refers, and after punctuation such as a full stop, without a space (to prevent separation through line wrap):
Whatever text you put in between these two tags will become visible in the "Notes and references" section as your reference.
Open the edit box for this page, copy the following text (inserting your own text where indicated), paste it at the bottom of the page and save the page:
(End of text to copy and paste.) It should appear like this:
You need to include the information to enable the reader to find your source. For an online newspaper source, it might look like this:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Note the single square brackets around the URL and the article title. The format is:
Make sure there is a space between the URL and the Title. This code results in the URL being hidden and the title showing as a link. Use double apostrophes for the article title (it is quoted text), and two single quote marks either side of the name of the paper (to generate italics). Double square brackets round the name of the paper create an internal link (a wikilink) to the relevant wikipedia article. Apostrophes must go outside the brackets. The date after The Guardian is the date of the newspaper, and the date after "Retrieved on" is the date you accessed the site – useful for searching the web archive in case the link goes dead. Dates are wikilinked so that they work with user preference settings to display the date in the format the user wishes.
You can use sources which are not online, but which you have found in a library or elsewhere—in which case leave out the information which is not relevant. The newspaper example above would be formatted like this:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Here is an example for a book:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Make sure you put two single quote marks round the title (to generate italics), rather than one double quote mark.
These formats are all acceptable for dates:
You may prefer to use a citation template to compile details of the source. The template goes between the ref tags and you fill out the fields you wish to. Basic templates can be found here: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference
The first time a reference appears in the article, you can give it a simple name in the <ref> code:
The second time you use the same reference in the article, you need only to create a short cut instead of typing it all out again:
You can then use the short cut as many times as you want. Don't forget the /, or it will blank the rest of the article! A short cut will only pick up from higher up the page, so make sure the first ref is the full one. Some symbols don't work in the ref name, but you'll find out if you use them. You can see multiple use of the same refs in action in the article William Bowyer (artist). There are 3 sources and they are each referenced 3 times. Each statement in the article has a footnote to show what its source is.
The above method is simple and combines references and notes into one section. A refinement is to put the full details of the references in their own section headed "References", while the notes which apply to them appear in a separate section headed "Notes". The notes can be inserted in the main article text in an abbreviated form as seen in Harriet Arbuthnot or in a full form as in Brown Dog affair.
More information can be found at:
I hope this helps. If you need any assistance, let me know. |
GFDL
[edit]Maybe you could get some GFDL releases of images to go with articles you have edited. This can be for low res images. See User_talk:VAwebteam#GFDL. The Victoria and Albert Museum have released a lot of images under GFDL. Ty 00:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Mark staff brandl.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Mark staff brandl.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en
wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en
wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:30, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Markstaffbrandl2.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Markstaffbrandl2.jpg, which you've sourced to Mark Staff Brandl. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —innotata 20:37, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
File:Wesleykimler.jpg listed for discussion
[edit]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wesleykimler.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 10:02, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Homerin.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Homerin.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:20, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
December 2024
[edit]Hello Art Scholar. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Mark Staff Brandl, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.
Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.
Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Art Scholar. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Art Scholar|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:37, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- I am not employed nor do I have any financial stake in the people I have edited. In particular, Mark Staff Brandl and Th.Emil Homerin, the subject here. I am not a paid advocate of anyone in any fashion. I am an art and cultural historian and have tried to bring some of those people into Wikipedia, when students and other experts have asked me about them, and others, who I hope to get to later. I am sorry if that impression arose, but it is not true. Is this reply enough, or how do i register/prove my neutrality? Art Scholar (talk) 15:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- My concerns are that:
- Nearly every edit you have made in the past 19 years has been to Mark Staff Brandl.
- 12 years ago, you added this personal photo of him.
- You have added links to his work on other articles.
- You know the name of his high school, despite no source supporting this bit of personal knowledge on his article.
- Please take a moment to re-read the COI policy and respond. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the answer. Brandl is rather a renowned artist and art historian in Europe and the artworld in the US, and I have been involved with Museums collecting his work and the like, so he was the easiest for me. He collaborated with Homerin, so that is how I got to know that person. Indeed, art historians have "Steckpferde," as we say here, artists who they tend to write about a lot. Once again, I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. Just a creator I know a lot about. He has given several speeches in Kunsthallen and so on where I was present. Yes, he gave me that photo, or better said his Zurich gallery gave it, as it is a photo by me originally, but one they use for press releases and the like. OK, I'll get an online reference to his and Homerin's High School (PCHS) and add a reference. I really should do others, but as I am an expert in his work, that comes quickly, and when I refer to him in my speeches or so, I tell people to check out Wikipedia (I appreciate this site for such referrals, for people to begin research). Then I notice stuff. I am not very tech savvy, but am an art expert. I checked the COI policies and saw nothing I am violating, other than being too lazy to do other artists (sorry). Art Scholar (talk) 17:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- OK, here is one link to Brandl in Pekin High School: https://www.pekintimes.com/story/news/2012/04/18/this-day-in-history/63869858007/
- Should I edit it into a reference on the page and then repost? Art Scholar (talk) 17:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- And by the way, I'd like to thank you and all the other dedicated Wiki people, who are not as lazy as me. And for being as particular as you were here. That keeps the quality up. I truly use it a lot as a referral for students to go to first to start their searches, and then progress on to other sources. Oh, and Merry Christmas, schöni wiähnacht, Happy Hanukkah, Io Saturnalia, Happy Winter Solstice, Happy Kwanzaa, whatever you celebrate. Art Scholar (talk) 18:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the answer. Brandl is rather a renowned artist and art historian in Europe and the artworld in the US, and I have been involved with Museums collecting his work and the like, so he was the easiest for me. He collaborated with Homerin, so that is how I got to know that person. Indeed, art historians have "Steckpferde," as we say here, artists who they tend to write about a lot. Once again, I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. Just a creator I know a lot about. He has given several speeches in Kunsthallen and so on where I was present. Yes, he gave me that photo, or better said his Zurich gallery gave it, as it is a photo by me originally, but one they use for press releases and the like. OK, I'll get an online reference to his and Homerin's High School (PCHS) and add a reference. I really should do others, but as I am an expert in his work, that comes quickly, and when I refer to him in my speeches or so, I tell people to check out Wikipedia (I appreciate this site for such referrals, for people to begin research). Then I notice stuff. I am not very tech savvy, but am an art expert. I checked the COI policies and saw nothing I am violating, other than being too lazy to do other artists (sorry). Art Scholar (talk) 17:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- My concerns are that:
