User talk:Philsp

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Philsp! Thank you for your contributions. I am ThatPeskyCommoner and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You might want to consider being "adopted" by an experienced user who would show you how wikipedia works through a program called adopt-a-user. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Pesky (talk …stalk!) 15:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some tips to help you out!

Hi Philsp, I thought I'd drop a few notes on your talk page with some help on writing articles :o)

First of all, it may be best for you to do a bit of reading, starting with the Wikipedia manual of style, which will give you a lot of information about how Wikipedia prefers its articles to be written. It's not as hard to follow as it might look; quite a bit of the information there probably won't be vital for you at first.

Second, I recommend you make a user sandbox - which is just an area you can use to practise in, and to make notes in, and to get things ready in. If you click this red link: user:Philsp/Sandbox, that will let you create that page (it gives you an edit window to start work in). Anything, anywhere, on the help and information pages which gives you an example, try it out in your sandbox until you're familiar with it.

For your article, the next thing you want to do is start collecting as much information as you can about it. Google searches (particularly in Books and Scholar) will be your best friend for this! Once you've found the information, the next most important thing is to start writing up each fact in your own words (very important, this), and make a note at the same time of exactly where that information came from. Build in the references as you go along; I'm going to copy in, down below this, a whole heap of help on doing references, which was produced by one of our best teachers (Chzz).

Here's another place that you'll find incredibly useful - citation templates which you can copy and paste into your sandbox, between <ref></ref> tags; you just fill in the blanks from your sources into the template, and you'll end up with nicely formatted inline citations :o) It all helps. Remember to add a references section to your sandbox (make a new line, and put ==References== on it, and type {{reflist}} on the next line, so that you can see how your citations look as you do them. Remember to save your page often! You don't want to lose your work.

Hopefully this will give you a good start and make life easier for you.

One last thing to keep as a motto: "It's better to write one good, well-referenced, nicely-presented article than it is to create fifty unreferenced one-line stubs!" Pesky (talk …stalk!) 15:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How references work

Simple references

These require two parts;

a)

Chzz is 98 years old.<ref> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref>

He likes tea. <ref> [http://www.nicecupofteaandasitdown.com Tea website] </ref>

b) A section called "References" with the special code "{{reflist}}";

== References ==
{{reflist}}

(an existing article is likely to already have one of these sections)

To see the result of that, please look at user:chzz/demo/simpleref. Edit it, and check the code; perhaps make a test page of your own, such as user:Philsp/reftest and try it out.

Named references

Chzz was born in 1837. <ref name=MyBook>
"The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. 
</ref> 

Chzz lives in Footown.<ref name=MyBook/>

Note that the second usage has a / (and no closing ref tag). This needs a reference section as above; please see user:chzz/demo/namedref to see the result.

Citation templates

You can put anything you like between <ref> and </ref>, but using citation templates makes for a neat, consistent look;

Chzz has 37 Olympic medals. <ref> {{Citation
 | last = Smith
 | first = John
 | title = Olympic medal winners of the 20th century
 | publication-date = 2001
 | publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]]
 | page = 125
 | isbn = 0-521-37169-4
}}
</ref>

Please see user:chzz/demo/citeref to see the result.

For more help and tips on that subject, see user:chzz/help/refs.

Something to make your life easier!

Hi there Philsp! I've just come across one of your articles, and noticed that you might appreciate some help with references.

You might want to consider using this tool - it makes your life a whole heap easier, by filling in complete citation templates for your links. All you do is install the script on Special:MyPage/common.js, or or Special:MyPage/vector.js, then paste the bare url (without [...] brackets) between your <ref></ref> tabs, and you'll find a clickable link called Reflinks in your toolbox section of the page (probably in the left hand column). Then click that tool. It does all the rest of the work (provided that you remember to save the page! It doesn't work for everything (particularly often not for pdf documents), but for pretty much anything ending in "htm" or "html" (and with a title) it will do really, really well. Happy editing! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 15:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Youd

I get that his actual birth name was Sam Youd. you made the initial changes without citing any sources, including obituaries or the SF encyclopedia, where i finally found a source for it. i have added such to the article, but i think to switch his name over entirely to sam youd, which is not well known outside of his circle of friends, would require some discussion on the talk page of the the article. I wont revert any of your changes (i dislike edit warring intensely), but I would ask that more inline sources be added, and a discussion be started. I do want to note that you have edited here under this user name a total of 40 edits. While i really want to welcome you, you might want to honor some of the other editors experience here as well (I have done a bit more, though i have never held a professional editing position). you seem to have an interest in the minutiae of the SF world, which i completely respect as necessary here. And, if consensus at some point is to change the article name back, or to rewrite using Sam extensively, i will defer of course. Also note, internationally, his WP articles are all Samuel or John (not that thats an authoritative answer, of course).User:Mercurywoodrose 76.232.10.255 (talk) 07:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You make valid points. When i first made corrections to your corrections, i didnt have any sources for your changes. i then found the one source (sf encyc) for his kept birth name. I agree that we need to document a person's actual name. There is however some debate at many other articles on what the article should be called when there are multiple names involved. In his case, he is best known by most casual readers as John Christopher, to bibliophiles as Samuel Youd with lots of pseudonyms, to people in the SF fraternity as Sam, etc: it will require some consensus building (and i wont even try to push any pov at this point, just follow it a bit). Please accept my apology for the quickness in my editing. even with your not providing an initial source, i was still reverting to info that was not fully sourced itself. I will, again, not revert any changes you make, and will bring up any of my concerns on the talk page. PS this all comes about from my love of his work when i was a youth, and my efforts to improve the article a few months ago (and the creation of the template for his works as JC). so, i am guilty of WP:OWN, which i can see is easy to slip into if one is passionate about the subject. PPS my condolences to his family.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Recent photo of Richard A. Lupoff.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Recent photo of Richard A. Lupoff.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 {{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}} 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Recent photo of Richard A. Lupoff.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Recent photo of Richard A. Lupoff.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 {{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}} 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:45, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Frances Deegan/Frances Yerxa/Frances Hamling

Got your email. I started that article a few years ago, and I don't remember all the details, only that the Deegan pseudonym was complicated. I'll edit the article to reflect that better. Thanks for reaching out. Penny Richards (talk) 14:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Proofreaders page cover 2011 320.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Proofreaders page cover 2011 320.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 22:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Philsp! Your additions to The Proofreaders' Page and Other Uncollected Items have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. The4lines |||| ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 15:18, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (The Proofreaders' Page and Other Uncollected Items) for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 01:01, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to make edit requests. You are not welcome to continue edit warring to re-insert copyright violations Star Mississippi 01:02, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What copyright violation? The text I inserted (in good faith) was text I wrote myself. I am trying to be positive here and I do not understand why you are behaving in this way. Philsp (talk) 07:12, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a copyright violation, and you should not be editing to promote your own content. That you don't understand the former likely means your block should be larger. Star Mississippi 12:56, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you escalating this rather than trying to be helpful? I'm not "editing to promote my own content" - the book was created for a very specific group of Fred Brown fans and its sales were not affected at all by it being listed in Wikipedia. At the time, there was nowhere else to list the contents for those who might be curious (as the ISFDb only handles SF) so Wikipedia was the obvious place. Since a couple of years ago there has been a much better place to index it, and it has been indexed there, so as I have said more than once, it is no great concern of mine whether it is listed in Wikipedia or not.

However, I find your implied threat of "your block should be larger" very disconcerting and unhelpful. I replaced one piece of text I wrote with another piece of text I wrote, and provided a link to a site that quoted that text because I believed that was what Wikpedia wanted. Mayhap I was wrong in that assumption but neither piece of text is any more copyrighted than the other - I placed both pieces of text in the public domain which, as far as I knew, met Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion.

If you would care to elaborate on why you think this is a copyright violation, I would be happy to listen to your reasons, but simply making threats gets us nowhere. Philsp (talk) 15:18, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was not intended as a threat and if you believe it's not a correct block, you're welcome to contest it and another admin will take action. I think you fundamentally misunderstand what this project is for-which is not indexing a book for a group of fans. I will not weigh in on the deletion discussion, but if you want it to be retained look for sourcing to indicate it meets WP:NBOOK which is the simplest path for its retention. Star Mississippi 01:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said before, I am not bothered whether it is deleted or not. I think there are differing opinions as to what "this project is for" and I agree that I fundamentally disagree with your view of that. I would also humbly suggest that the fact that there are so many pages that "violate" the rules makes it fairly clear that the fault probably lies with the rules rather than with the authors. My concern remains the degree of hostility that is shown to the "great unwashed" who try to contribute to Wikipedia. I appreciate you made an honest mistake when you thought I was quoting copyrighted text, but you seem to prefer to "double down" rather than admit that, which is a shame. Philsp (talk) 06:52, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No one is doubling down, you haven't requested an unblock.

But here's the issue, you can make a case for changed guidelines, or you can edit within the guidelines. You can't willfully edit in contravention of them and expect to be successful. Star Mississippi 18:01, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not interested in being unblocked - I really have no interest in whether or not the page stays on Wikipedia - it's Wikipedia's loss, not mine.

What concerns me is being accused of copyright violation when no such violation took place. A simple query to me would have resolved that particular issue immediately rather than jumping to the conclusion, based on no evidence, that copyright was being violated. Philsp (talk) 19:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Proofreaders' Page and Other Uncollected Items for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Proofreaders' Page and Other Uncollected Items is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Proofreaders' Page and Other Uncollected Items until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:29, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Proofreaders page cover 2011 320.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Proofreaders page cover 2011 320.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]