Jump to content

User talk:Uranoz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

[edit]
Hello Uranoz, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

Uranoz, good luck, and have fun. – Aboutmovies (talk) 04:31, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

[edit]

I want to use a photograph on a page, and the upload wizard form has a section called "Evidence". Where / how can I access the license agreements referenced in this section? How does an artist "sign" a license agreement? Uranoz (talk) 06:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to {{help me}} request: The complete policy on images is located here: Wikipedia:Image use policy. A couple other questions I would need to know before I could give a more detailed answer. Who is the artist? Where did you get the picture? And where do you want to use it? I'll return and give additional help after you've had a chance to check out the policy and answer these questions. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  (User:Wtwilson3)  — 13:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bill,
Thank you for responding to my question.
Answers to your questions are as follows:
Artist: John Farmer de la Torre (photographer)
Why: this image is a portrait of the subject of a new Wikipedia page that I am creating for Aliki Barnstone. This page is currently in my sandbox only, and has not yet been reviewed. Aliki wants to use this portrait on her page. The artist, John de la Torre, has given here permission to do this, but has not exactly defined the usage rights. I want to provide a clear overview of usage options for Wikipedia to him.
License: I was going to recommend to John de la Torre, that he use the "Creative Commons Attribute-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License"
Where: I received the photograph from Alike Barnstone, who is the subject of the page, who was given the image by John de la Torre.
When: I do not yet know the date that this image was created. I will get the date when I email the artist, John de la Torre, about the license and how to authorize use of the image.
I had already read most of the the Image and Licensing information you cited, and similarly, found it difficult to understand the overall process and how to implement all the required steps for that process. Hence, my question, which I would still appreciate receiving an answer.
Where are the licenses located that are to be signed by the artist, and exactly how does the artist go about making this signature.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Uranoz (talk • contribs) 19:59, 8 October 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]
There is no license to be signed by the artist. That's not how it works. Please review this part of the image policy: Wikipedia:Image use policy#Free licenses. If you personally know the artist and want to have him release the work, this article will tell you how to do that: Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  (User:Wtwilson3)  — 14:41, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

[edit]

I have created a page in my sandbox area for the writer/poet Aliki Barnstone, and submitted it for approval for publication more than one month ago (10/17/2014). Since then, I have heard nothing and as far as I can tell, the page is not live.

The original message told me it could take up to one month to be approved.

Can somebody please tell me exactly what I have to do to get this page published?

Thank you.

Uranoz (talk) 04:23, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There was a complicated series of page moves on 10 November to titles like User:Aliki Barnstone and Wikipedia:Aliki Barnstone. It has ended up in the right place at Draft:Aliki Barnstone, but I fear that all the moving may have dropped it out of the AfC reviewing queue. I will check and let you know. JohnCD (talk) 12:20, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, there is a severe backlog on articles for creation. Your article is still pending review, but the referencing isn't very clear. On the plus side there isn't an obvious fail here either. These two factors together have held the article back a bit, until there is a volunteer with the right skills to examine it. Rankersbo (talk) 12:51, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the responses JohnCD and Rankersbo.

What do you mean by "references"? Is there something that I should/can do to help?

There is a Wikipedia:Verifiability policy, summarised as "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source". It is desirable to make clear which statements in the article are supported by which references. See Help:Referencing for beginners.
There is also an inclusion criterion called Wikipedia:Notability which looks for evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything without editorial control; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones like publishers, and anything based on press releases. See also WP:Notability (people), particularly the section WP:AUTHOR.
Most of your links are to things she has written. Interviews count for something, depending on the venue, but are still basically the subject talking about herself. What is most valuable in establishing notability is things written about her by someone else, e.g. independent reviews.
In talk pages (but not in articles) it is helpful to know who said what when, so it useful to "sign" your posts by ending them with a group of four "tilde" characters ~~~~, which the system will turn into a "signature" of your username and the time and date, like this: JohnCD (talk) 22:42, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

JohnCD, thank you very much. This is very helpful. Should I do anything at this point - such as add new content with external information on Aliki Barnstone with references, or should I just wait for the review to be completed?

Also, thanks for the head's up on the signature. I thought as the originator of the post, my signature would be automatic, but obviously not.

Uranoz (talk) 22:50, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By all means improve the draft now, that will make it more likely to pass the review first time, rather than being sent back for improvement. JohnCD (talk) 23:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Will do - thank you.

Uranoz (talk) 23:48, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Aliki Barnstone (December 5)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Primefac was:
This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.
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. Primefac (talk) 22:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this rejection is unwarranted. There are 9 citations provided, and a long list of publications with URLs provided. Several of the awards given to this subject are NOT available to cite online, but the validity of these awards is confirmed in the Faculty listing at the University Of Missouri, who has published this subjects awards as a matter of fact.

Uranoz (talk) 23:11, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Aliki Barnstone concern

[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Aliki Barnstone, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:30, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Aliki Barnstone concern

[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Aliki Barnstone, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Aliki Barnstone

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Aliki Barnstone requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Draft%3AAliki+Barnstone&oldid=&action=compare&url=https%3A%2F%2Fenglish.missouri.edu%2Fgraduate-and-doctoral-faculty%2F118-barnstone.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. —Anne Delong (talk) 22:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Artist Winston Branch holding a paintings from his Alta Bates show in Oakland, CA 2011.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Artist Winston Branch holding a paintings from his Alta Bates show in Oakland, CA 2011.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 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. Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:42, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Hello Mr. Jones, wanted to let you know that the artist Winston Branch has submitted the completed copyright approval form to the permissions-en@wikimedia.org address. Please let me know if this is acceptable. Thank you. uranoz Uranoz (talk) 20:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HELLO, I see that Mr. Branch's photo has been removed from his article. The copyright usage was established. as you noted, and Mr. Branch forwarded his permission, as owner of the image, to the email address permissions-en@wikimedia.org you provided immediately after you provided that guidance. I messaged this board of this fact the day Mr. Branch sent the email. Why has the image been removed, and what is needed so the image can be used? Uranoz (talk) 06:30, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Artist Winston Branch holding a paintings from his Alta Bates show in Oakland, CA 2011.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Artist Winston Branch holding a paintings from his Alta Bates show in Oakland, CA 2011.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 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your conflict of interest in editing Wikipedia

[edit]
Information icon

Hello Uranoz. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Winston Branch, 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, 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:Uranoz. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Uranoz|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. —T.E.A. (Talk•Edits) 03:50, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@T.E.A: Hello T.E.A. Thank you for notifying me that I am under suspicion of black hat activity. I have been an admirer of Mr. Winston Branch's artwork for over twenty years, and am not being compensated directly or indirectly by any entity or individual for any posts that I have made to Wikipedia at any time. --Uranoz (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Uranoz: It is good to hear that you are not being payed for your editing. Your statement that "Artists want me to publish images on their own Wikipedia page ... I will be uploading the images for the artists, editing their Wiki page, and conducting all interaction with Wikipedia - at the request of the artist" which you made on Wikimedia Commons here peaked my concern quite a bit and made it seem if you were being payed by artists to edit and improve their Wikipedia pages. Even if you are not being payed to make your edits I think you should also, but you are not required to, be clear and make a note of your relationships that connect to your editing as explained at Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with close associations#Declare your conflicts of interest. I would also be careful not to breach the content guidelines concerning autobiographical edits, which you seem to be involved in here where you said you acted "per personal request or the artist". Lastly, and I want to apologize for making you read so much, I would like to remind of community established norms concerning minor edits. You've made multiple edits, such as this one and this one which are not trivial nor unimportant and change the meaning of the article and therefore don't fall under the criteria for minor edits. Thanks. —T.E.A. (Talk•Edits) 17:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@T.E.A: Thank you for the links for guidance on posting to Wikipedia. I will read up and refer to the edits you cite. My comments were an over abundance of caution to clarify that art works being posted were approved for usage by the artist. I did not take into account any possible reference of compensation, since that was not a factor in my case. I can say as a strictly occasional editor on Wikipedia, it would be very helpful if an auto email with all of these links, and any other essential links, could be sent to individuals immediately after they sign up as an editor. I have found the amount of information, and the complexity of the site, and processes, to be difficult to understand and navigate. Thankfully, the moderators have been very helpful, and I think the correct steps for editing and using artwork are much more clear to me now. I expect to be mostly dormant for quite a while but will keep the guidance in mind if and when I ever make any future edits. Best regards, --Uranoz (talk) 17:48, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Uranoz&oldid=1085829146"