User talk:GosztolaK

This is GosztolaK's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chip Gibbons (September 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nearlyevil665 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Chip Gibbons and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Chip Gibbons, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

nearlyevil 665 22:28, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GosztolaK! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! nearlyevil 665 22:28, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chip Gibbons (November 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ThadeusOfNazereth was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Almost all of the sourcing here is primary (as in, they're either articles by Gibbons or profiles on his employer's websites). A couple of the sources are fine (Mondowiess, Palestine Legal, NYT), but they don't show that he meets the criteria at WP:JOURNALIST.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Chip Gibbons and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Chip Gibbons, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ThadeusOfNazereth^{Talk to Me!} 21:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Chip Gibbons

Hello, GosztolaK. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Chip Gibbons, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:00, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Chip Gibbons

Hello, GosztolaK. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Chip Gibbons".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

COI

You're actually allowed to contribute to the talk page, but you should declare your conflict of interest on your user page and not edit the article. In the edits you deleted, you wrote there are newer photos of Khalek. Do you know if any have been released under an acceptable creative commons license? Would make it much easier to use if there is one with a creative commons share alike license. nableezy - 20:58, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have drafted a user page that lists my conflict of interest. Not sure how to make it permanent on Wikipedia. But thanks for the clarification, and Bilorv offered the same suggestion. So I could return to Rania Khalek's Talk page and point those with access privileges to a Creative Commons-Licensed photo for replacement. GosztolaK (talk) 14:10, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Go to User:GosztolaK, paste your draft, press publish page. nableezy - 01:48, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you GosztolaK (talk) 02:56, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image of Rania Khalek

Hi GosztolaK! I gather that you have some personal connection to the subject Rania Khalek and I noticed your comment here that reads: Her current photo is also from 2012, and it is a lower quality screen shot. There are photos circulating of Rania from 2022 that should replace this profile image.

Wikipedia is free in many senses—it's free to read, written by unpaid volunteers and it's also largely free to reproduce. That is, you can copy and adapt any text from Wikipedia that you'd like, with attribution, and use it for any purpose, including where this would usually be a violation of the author's copyright. For this reason, we are quite strict on the copyright of photos we use, so that people can reuse the photos freely as well.

Anyway, my point is this: a photo is copyrighted by the person who takes it. We can't use these photos in Wikipedia unless the photographer releases their copyright freely. If you can get Khalek to take a selfie and release the image freely, or find an image that Khalek likes and get the original photographer to release it freely, then this Release Generator walks you through the process. It'd be really helpful for us to have a better-quality image, and it seems you might prefer this also. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! — Bilorv (talk) 22:40, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation and suggestion. Does an image from the subject of a Wikipedia page have to appear anywhere in particular? Can it be on Twitter, Facebook, etc, and be designated as Creative Commons? Or do editors typically search for photos released more formally on a subject or biographical person's website so Wikipedia so it can be used? Are Twitter profile pictures not considered acceptable? GosztolaK (talk) 13:51, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Release Generator I linked should allow you to upload the image that you are releasing. The image could be previously published or never previously published, but all images are copyrighted by the person who takes it, so that person has to be the one who uses the tool. The release has to follow some quite specific rules to be legally binding, so the easiest way is to use the tool—publishing it on a personal website with specific text like "I, the copyright holder, release this image under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license" can be suitable, but previous publication without a specific release does not void your copyright ownership.

Volunteers sometimes search for freely licensed images/videos uploaded to Flickr, YouTube or other websites (which is how I believe the current image was obtained), sometimes take photos of the subject themselves (such as at a fan convention), and sometimes reach out to figures or their agents directly. As with every area of the website, we need 10 times more volunteers than we have, and as a result most living people's biographies have crap images or no image. — Bilorv (talk) 17:37, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]