Talk:Source Theatre Company (Washington, D.C.)

United States: District of Columbia Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Washington, D.C. portal This article is supported by WikiProject District of Columbia.

Theatre Low‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

{Infobox theatre group} assistance requested

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I created this stub article on the Source Theatre Company. In the past I have created similar articles, always using the {Infobox theatre group} however this is the first time I have attempted to use the "| disbanded =" parameter. When I used it, in the actual article the label comes up Extinction, which seems rather harsh. Is there a way I can get this infobox to use a "Disbanded" label rather than "Extinction"

Thanks

ed

Ecragg (talk) 20:46, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ecragg, this is really more of an issue to bring up at the talk page for {{infobox theatre group}} or WikiProject Templates (I suggest the latter since infoboxes are notoriously un-watched). I agree that "Extinction" is a strange term, but I'm sure there was a reason for it. Primefac (talk) 21:17, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{Infobox theatre group}} is based on Template:Infobox organization, which offers both "Extinction" and "Dissolved" for that field. I've changed the theatre group infobox to make use of the latter option. Huon (talk) 21:22, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As an additional note, the discussion about "extinction" seems to have been discussed multiple times at Template talk:Infobox organization. Feel free to restart the conversation, though. Primefac (talk) 21:24, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Old Photograph Rights, Citations Questions

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I in contact with the last artistic director for the Source Theatre Company. This contact is what led me to start this article. She has quite a bit of documentation of the company, to include newspaper clippings, production posters, and photographs. In looking over this work I have a couple of questions:

May I cite the newpaper clippings without providing a url? The citations will be based on the hard copy clipping and date back to the late 70s. Access to those online usually requires fee payment which I would rather not do.

May she, as the last artistic director, release rights to the company's official photographs and posters?

What, if anything, can be done to obtain rights for candid pictures where the photographer is unknown?

Thank you in advance

ed

Ecragg (talk) 13:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ecragg, welcome to Wikipedia!

Yes, offline sources are totally fine. Just give enough information (date, author, title, newspaper, etc.) so that someone could look the source up in a library or archive.
To be honest, I'm not entirely certain on this one...does she still have some sort of official email or other way to prove she was the director and is the copyright holder? I'll leave your "helpme" up just in case someone has a better answer.
Not much, I'm afraid. That unknown person would most likely still hold the copyright, and if you can't contact them, they can't license the photo under a free license so that it's usable on Wikipedia. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 14:20, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I unfortunately don't think the last artistic director can release the rights to the company's official photographs and posters. She no longer is the company's artistic director, and whoever now owns the copyright likely isn't represented by her. I would assume some entity will have inherited any remaining assets from the now-defunct company, but I'm not familiar enough with US law to tell who that would be - possibly the city of Washington D.C., or even some federal entity. Huon (talk) 14:31, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]