User talk:Slowking4

External audio
External audio
Dadaist Raoul Hausmann (1886-1971) reads his sound poem "b b b b et F m s b w"
	[71] written in 1918

External videos
External videos
	GSA Recovers Historic New Deal Art. U.S. General Services Administration

		Ball and Chain Mark of Shame [1] Deletion before Collaboration -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "collaboration is a lot of editors doing what admins tell them to."

Template:Attempting wikibreak

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following:

Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed.
Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply.

I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.

⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

	The Drama Llama is Watching You
	Save the Drama for Your Llama: the editor of this page reserves the right to delete trolling and drama at their discretion.... [2]

Welcome! Hello, Slowking4, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:53, 7 January 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Extended content

Wikpedia: Public Art - DC Task Force!

Thanks for your interest in helping bring DC public art to Wikipedia! We have updated our Task Force page for DC, so please take a look and get started. We look forward to seeing your contributions and please let me know if I can help you with anything. Missvain (talk) 14:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blake Gopnik (April 9, 2009). "Nationals' Sculptures: No Hits, Just Errors". Washington Post.

Nomination of Katherine Larson for deletion

The article Katherine Larson is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katherine Larson until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Levinge (talk) 17:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Importance levels for Wikipedia:Public Art

Hi! We have decided to pull the importance level aspect of the WP:Public Art talk page tag. We have decided that it's too hard to judge the importance, following along the lines of other art based projects like Wikiproject:Visual Arts. Thanks for the work you're doing though! :) Missvain (talk) 18:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! Just curious, I saw that you updated the tags for both the United States and African Diaspora tags I recently placed on the Here I Stand sculpture. I usually don't update the projects I'm not involved in, but, perhaps you are involved in both of those too. What could be LOW on one wikiproject could be a C, or what could be a start, could be a stub on another project. Just letting you know :) Missvain (talk) 20:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

you beat me to the photo of "Here I Stand"Slowking4 (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on article assessment

keeping on mind Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team; Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ: "In general, anyone can add or change an article's rating. However, the "GA" and "FA" labels should only be used on articles that have been reviewed..."

class is class across all projects. there is a B class checklist, and Good and Feature consensus, but for C and below, it seems to me something is better than nothing, and if start for one, start for all; there are some bots that do this. and upgrade from stub to start is fine = grade inflation. i tend to give more weight to references and section headers, than the examples, and will lazily copy an underassessment. most projects don't seem to care about non-members assessing, except for ownership ones like Milhist.

for importance, yes, they are different among projects; while some don't use because it's too "i don't like it", i can see the usefulness, if you tied it to pageviews, to get priorities for an article improvement drive. you could also sort by articles lacking photos (phototag). (some information is better than none). it's part of a divide and conquer strategy for big problems. i don't know if it's better than randomly sprinkling improvement dust, but some people like a to do list. Slowking4 (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AFD Notice concerning William G. Scanlon

I know you recently added a reference to the article in question to disqualify it from WP:BLPPROD however, because notability is not inherited and the subject's membership in the ensemble does not make him notable, I have nominated the page for deletion. Please feel free to participate in the discussion should you wish. Thank you Hasteur (talk) 00:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Glenkiln-cross.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Glenkiln-cross.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Glenkiln-left.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Glenkiln-left.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Glenkiln-right.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Glenkiln-right.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Figure-hepworth.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Figure-hepworth.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 16:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Figure-landscape-title.JPG

A tag has been placed on File:Figure-landscape-title.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{non-free fair use in|article name that the file is used in}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 16:37, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Are-years-what-left.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Are-years-what-left.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 02:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Are-years-what-right.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Are-years-what-right.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 02:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Are-years-what-street.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Are-years-what-street.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 02:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Are-years-what.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Are-years-what.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 02:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arlington dog mural

Hello! I saw your draft for an article about the Arlington dog mural. I live in the area, so let me know if you need in photos or any other help. BurtAlert (talk) 19:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i was waiting for the court decision, to avoid the charge of one event. Slowking4 (talk) 19:45, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Four-sided-pyramid-title.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Four-sided-pyramid-title.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Typewriter-eraser.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Typewriter-eraser.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Armbrust ^{WrestleMania XXVII} _{Undertaker 19–0} 17:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Untitled-1969.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Untitled-1969.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:45, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Cubi-xi.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Cubi-xi.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:24, 5 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 19:24, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i took the photo, and if the kludgy licensing template would allow me to license i would. do you actually fix things or tag spam? Slowking4 (talk) 19:30, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Puellae.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Puellae.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 19:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Spider bourgeois.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Spider bourgeois.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:45, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!!!

		The Wikipedia Saves Public Art Barnstar
		Thank you for all the work you're putting into creating public art pages and sharing your great photographs too! Missvain (talk) 04:26, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - thanks for the help. I've never been very good with those rationales...the picture dates to before I knew what "freedom of panorama" was all about. Ah, such innocent times...

Keep up the good work, and happy editing! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

threatening to delete images unless the phototaker fills out a checklist is demoralizing. how many perfectly good images are lost because of form over function? not to mention policy changing, and the same bullying over the rules. if they would fix stuff i would have more sympathy. Slowking4 (talk) 22:04, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of ani discussion

Informational note: this is to let you know that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards, AerobicFox (talk) 06:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Untitled-1969.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Untitled-1969.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 or which could be adequately covered with text alone. 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. N419 BH 07:33, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i took a picture myself, use does not fail criterion. Slowking4 (talk) 19:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Untitled (Shapiro)

The article Untitled (Shapiro) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. N419 BH 07:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Two-Piece Reclining Figure: Points

The article Two-Piece Reclining Figure: Points has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

not notable

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. N419 BH 07:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Three-Piece Reclining Figure No. 2: Bridge Prop

The article Three-Piece Reclining Figure No. 2: Bridge Prop has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

not notable

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. N419 BH 07:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Two-piece.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Two-piece.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Slowking4. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Orphaned non-free image File:Untitled-kelly.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Untitled-kelly.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Alexander Pushkin (Bourganov)

The article Alexander Pushkin (Bourganov) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability of this statue by itself. Fails WP:GNG. Cannot determine if a reasonable redirect target exists.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ravendrop 07:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alexander Pushkin (Bourganov) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alexander Pushkin (Bourganov) 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/Alexander Pushkin (Bourganov) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Ravendrop 02:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Matthew Bruch for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Matthew Bruch 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/Matthew Bruch until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article.

March 2011

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Marino Marini (sculptor), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. You were warned to not re-add non-free content to the article or else you would be issued this warning. Your comment to "warn someone who cares" shows a flagrant disregard for the policies as well. If you continue along this path you may be blocked.Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

actually you are being disruptive [3], no, not disregard for policy, disregard for your pomposity, warnings in edit comment space are precious: "Replacing this image will result in a vandalism warning." i've added more critical commentary, is it enough for you? is it worth taking to ANI? a block from you, would be a badge of honor. Slowking4 (talk) 16:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hidebound ignorance.Slowking4 (talk) 16:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ivor Fox-Strangways Guest, 3rd Viscount Wimborne

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 Ivor Fox-Strangways Guest, 3rd Viscount Wimborne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Takeo™ 16:01, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:Wishtreesign.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Wishtreesign.JPG. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:07, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to take part in a pilot study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes’’’. cooldenny (talk) 18:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Geometric mouse.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Geometric mouse.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jamietw (talk) 16:17, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

rationale was already provided in strict accordance with Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Policy, use of template does not address the 10 points; is not required, but you may use the template if you wish. Slowking4 (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:House-right.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:House-right.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 03:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of River Spirits of the Anacostia for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article River Spirits of the Anacostia 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/River Spirits of the Anacostia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:44, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Slowking4. You have new messages at File talk:Ms100%fun.jpg.
Message added 03:22, 5 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Alexander Leslie-Melville, 7th Earl of Leven

this redirects to 9th Earl which is wrong. Kittybrewster ☎ 09:37, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Robert Leslie-Melville, 14th Earl of Leven

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Alexander Robert Leslie-Melville, 14th Earl of Leven, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.engager.eu/earl_of_leven_en.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Geometric_mouse.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Geometric_mouse.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 11:48, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

For your work on the Julie Robinson page, and your comments on the discussion. BlueThird (talk) 00:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bonniejocampbell2.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bonniejocampbell2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 15:36, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work

Nice work on The Alarm (Boyle). BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 20:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'm glad you started the John J. Boyle page. BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 01:42, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would you have any objection to my changing the page title to John J. Boyle (sculptor)? I've never seen his name without the middle initial. BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 15:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Philly Public Art

I may have gotten myself into something on this. Your link says there are over 900 outdoor sculptures in Philly. Another way of looking at the SIRIS database gave 724. I may pull out entirely, go slow, or just start making a few articles w/photos before getting involved in a "project." At least I have the database and a way to search it properly. A couple of things about the database and tables - where do the coords come from? Why can't I always find a date field (even if it is empty)? Is anything they photograph acceptable for being photographed for Wikipedia (re:copyright - I expect not)?

River Horse (sculpture)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of River Horse (sculpture), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.gwu.edu/~presemer/hippo.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:37, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Cyprus in Washington, D.C.

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Embassy of Cyprus in Washington, D.C., and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.electionguide.org/country-links.php?ID=57.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Major General Nathanael Greene (Brown)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Major General Nathanael Greene (Brown), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.shorpy.com/user/1678.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:37, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

George Washington

I noticed that you changed the caption to the Clark Mills equestrian statue of Washington. I am not sure that to call it "Lieutenant General George Washington" is entirely correct. According to the research I was able to do at this time, this statue is supposed to be of Washington reviewing his troops at Princeton in 1777. It's my understanding that in 1777 Washington held the rank of Major General, the rank of Lt. General not being given until 1798. Maybe I'm mistaken on this? Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 16:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

good point, the name is confusing, i was adding a link to the sculpture article. i am going by the Smithsonian database for the work here [4], but they have been known to be wrong, and we may not necessarily follow their name convention, if you change, please retain the link. Slowking4 (talk) 16:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct, the SI reference does seem to be incorrect. Maybe you could help me out with something...I am having a hard time finding a citable reference that states what Washington's rank actually was in 1777 at Princeton. I mean, I know what's true, but I need a verifiable source and all that. If you come up with a source, please post it here. I'll take care of correcting the caption and any other pertinent links. -Shearonink (talk) 20:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i wouldn't get too hung up on the name. couldn't find another source that calls it xyz, that's the one to go by? found a webpage that says: "General and Commander in Chief" [5] (author is rev war roundtable dc member) i would suggest "George Washington (Mills)" for a rename. note that the uniform and hat don't correspond with trumbull, who was an eyewitness (so i wouldn't be surprised if artist conflated the rank as well). Slowking4 (talk) 20:24, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maya Bejerano

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Maya Bejerano, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.ithl.org.il/author_info.asp?id=45.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lilian Westcott Hale

There's an extra "T" in there...don't know how it disappeared along the way. *sigh* I wish I could remember why I know her name... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:10, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for catch, i followed the misspelled red link from systemic bias. however the EC did bounce my edit, lost 2nd time (hate this old browser with no edit history recovery).Slowking4 (talk) 20:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google search suggests that it may be an alternate spelling (see the Phillips Collection website...if anyone should know it would be they). No worries - I fixed it up. I suspect I have a copy of one of her paintings hanging on my bedroom wall, and I could have sworn that she's in the NMWA collection, though their database says otherwise. No matter - I'll look tonight. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

that is their oversight. betcha i saw her at the chase exhibition NGA 1987 [6] Slowking4 (talk) 20:22, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bit before my time, that one, I'm afraid. I'm well familiar with her sister-in-law's work, though...that self-portrait really is impressive. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

misspelling at Spanierman, title different spelling from body, maiden name. influencial summer school, en plein air. need pic of phillips art. Slowking4 (talk) 20:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there must be a free image around somewhere... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quite alright - I have a tendency to jump the gun from time to time. My own damn fault. Sorry about that. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:08, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Slowking4. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Archives of American Art Update!

Hi! I just wanted to deliver a little news about the Archives of American Art partnership project! We have released our amazing barnstar to the world, learn how you can earn one here! We will be having a Backstage Pass tour later this month which will be announced this week, and an upcoming contest in which major contributors can win some amazing goodies from the Archives and Smithsonian, allowing for international involvement! Thanks again for your interest and I look forward to your continued participation in this ongoing project to better coverage on American art history on Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 18:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me you're coming to the backstage pass =)

AAA Backstage Pass, July 29!! SarahStierch (talk) 20:31, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check your userpage!! The bottom. SarahStierch (talk) 20:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Philadelphia Public Art

Please do go ahead with the Philly public art list. I've been a bit under the weather and very slow on this (maybe I should be the "Slow King" :-P) Smallbones (talk) 23:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter

The first ever WikiProject National Archives newsletter has been published. Please read on to find out what we're up to and how to help out! There are many opportunities for getting more involved. Dominic·t 21:41, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter
July 2011

News

Featured article contest

This week, our first multilingual featured article contest was announced. We are aiming to improve the articles on the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, or Bill of Rights to featured or good status in English and other languages. Prizes for winners will be a gift package from the National Archives including a book of your choice or a tote bag, and other swag, plus, of course, a special barnstar.

August 6 backstage pass

Plans are in the works for a meetup and backstage pass event at the National Archives II facility in College Park, MD. There will be a regular social meetup, a discussion with Dominic about WP:NARA, a tour of the building by NARA staff, and then time for a scanathon and editathon in the research rooms and library until the building closes at 5 pm. Keep your schedules open!

From our recent uploads:

...see more.

Special requests:

This section includes special requests from the NARA staff:

Archival Recovery Team

The National Archives' Archival Recovery Team (ART) is a team of law enforcement agents and archivists who investigate NARA's lost and stolen documents. They have received media attention ([7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]) and would like to request an article be written for the team, if Wikipedians deem it notable. It is hoped that making more information about the group available on Wikipedia will increase public awareness of the documents they are seeking to recover.

Ongoing

Today's Document challenge

The Today's Document challenge is an opportunity for Wikipedians to get their work related to National Archives holdings spotlighted on Archives.gov and the National Archives' tumblr. Each day the National Archives selects a document related to the day's date to showcase. The goal is to get articles related to the selected documents on the main page in ""Did You Know...?" the same day that the National Archives features the document. Alternatively, other appropriate articles related to National Archives holdings not already selected will be used for new documents of the day by NARA staff and posted to their tumblr.

Wikisource

WP:NARA has a sister WikiProject on Wikisource, WS:NARA. On Wikisource, editors transcribe, proofread, and arrange documents. This helps to make little-known documents more discoverable, or well-known documents more searchable, and improves accessibility. See the files being worked on. If you are new to Wikisource and would like to participate, there are experienced Wikisourcerors willing to be mentors.

New contributions

A list of some recent contributions to the project:

Wikipedia

District of Columbia Compensated Emancipation Act (Fetchcomms)

Court of the Patriarchs (CutOffTies)

Opposition to the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom (Fetchcomms)

Wikisource¹

Memorial of Queen Liliuokalani in relation to the Crown lands of Hawaii

Petition from women of Brookline

Resolutions of the Joint Committee on the Washington Monument

H. R. 4982

A Petition For Universal Suffrage

Susan B. Anthony petition for remission of fine

Alexander Hamilton's commission to take rank as Colonel

¹Credit goes to Prosody, Theornamentalist, Inductiveload, Digipoke, George Orwell III, Kathleen.wright5, BirgitteSB, and Zhaladshar

Tools

Archives.gov grabber (Slakr)

Future plans

Major image contribution The National Archives has hundreds of thousands of digitized documents in its holdings. We are working on a bulk upload to Commons of one particular cache of about 123,000 TIFF master files in the next few days! Once uploaded, these will require a massive community effort to help categorize the files on Commons and add them to articles on Wikipedia or transcribe them on Wikisource.	Inclusion in the online catalog We are currently working on a system for including links to pages on Wikimedia projects in the National Archives online catalog. The Wikimedia projects are hosting an increasing number of transcriptions of National Archives documents and high-quality image and video files that are not available through NARA's own site. Links to these Wikimedia pages in the documents' actual catalog records will benefit the end user by providing them access to further resources about the documents, and they will also demonstrate the National Archives commitment to supporting Wikimedians' efforts.
To stop receiving this newsletter, please remove your name from the list.

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 July 21

Hi. I've replied to all your various comments (so far) at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 July 21 and I'd be grateful if you could respond there. Thanks. ╟─Treasury Tag►Syndic General─╢ 15:07, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_July_17

Schuminweb is asking you questions at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_July_17 WhisperToMe (talk) 23:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Pb-crest-2.jpg

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Pb-crest-2.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DC Meetup, July 29

DC Meetup 21 - Who should come? You should. Really.
	DC MEETUP 21 is July 29! This meet up will involve Wikipedians from the area as well as Wiki-loving GLAM professionals. See you Friday! SarahStierch (talk) 16:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Unfinished Business: Paul Keating's interrupted revolution for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Unfinished Business: Paul Keating's interrupted revolution 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/Unfinished Business: Paul Keating's interrupted revolution until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. damiens.rf 04:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image Rescue Squad

Great idea!!!! SarahStierch (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

James A. Bailey's statue of George Washington

I'm not sure where if you saw this photo on Commons, but I recategorized this image of George Washington which was mistakenly categorized Baltimore. commons:File:George_Washington_-_by_Lester_Spence.jpg. GcSwRhIc (talk) 17:16, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, smallbones has a photo, and it's in the List of public art in Philadelphia, more stuff to do. Slowking4: 7@1|x 17:24, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question. Would you think it an improvement to have the artists sort by last name? It's pretty simple for me to mark up. GcSwRhIc (talk) 17:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

yes, the smithsonian database has it last, first for that reason, but we change it so we can link to the artist article. if you had a way to link to artist article while displaying sorting by last that would be an improvement. Slowking4: 7@1|x 17:45, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Template:Sort was the answer. GcSwRhIc (talk) 18:32, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ooh that's pretty, gonna have to use it (you are the master coder) i take it you saw my excel partial thrash User:Slowking4/list of philadelphia public art. Slowking4: 7@1|x 18:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Artists were easy. It also can be used for artwork titles, but I probably wouldn't do it except for works starting with "The" or maybe "A" so:

{{sort|Washington Monument,The|[[The Washington Monument]]}}

GcSwRhIc (talk) 18:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

actually i found the {{sortname| Ike|Hay}} is better. Slowking4: 7@1|x 15:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Public Art data

So how bout that SI data? If you want to point me to the data you were talking about yesterday and let me know how it has to be processed, I'll see if I could meaningfully automate it.
--Qwerty0 (talk) 19:31, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok, what little i know about SIRIS: here's the database [15]; here's a query for philadelphia, limited by sculpture, sorted by sculpture name [16]

i tend to grab this and dump into a spreadsheet, since i couldn't find an export function. the title has a url to each record.

hard to see how to sort by location, so did a keyword; don't need images since license unclear, will take pictures; urls are useful but need to format into a cite web.

i got part way through here: User:Slowking4/list of philadelphia public art.

any automation would be greatly appreciated, since Baltimore is a follow-on, and other cities. Slowking4: 7@1|x 19:43, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok yeah, this is definitely ripe for the picking. When I find time I'll write up something to pull out whatever data you want. Are there any other cities on the to do list aside from Philly?

--Qwerty0 (talk) 18:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok based on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Public_art/Showcase#Lists_of_public_art:

List of public art in Philadelphia; more complete list = Outdoor Sculpture -- Pennsylvania -- Philadelphia

List of public art in New York City more complete survey = "Outdoor Sculpture -- New York -- New York"

List of public art in Baltimore given interest expressed at GLAM = "Outdoor Sculpture -- Maryland -- Baltimore"

List of public art in Los Angeles, stretch goal based on public art la website = "Outdoor Sculpture -- California -- Los Angeles"

those are the main ones. the column fields seem settled at: Title; Image; Artist; Year; Location; Coordinates; Material; Dimensions; Owner (references) Slowking4: 7@1|x 14:57, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of public art in Chicago, "Outdoor Sculpture -- Illinois -- Chicago"

List of public art in Baltimore

Well, I started it, List of public art in Baltimore. More work than I thought. Thanks for the layout. GcSwRhIc (talk) 01:00, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Aaa-whitegloves.jpg

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Aaa-whitegloves.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Slowking4, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Slowking4.

See a log of files removed today here.
Shut off the bot here.
Report errors here.
If you have any questions, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:El-Cid-Anna-H-Hunt---.jpg

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:El-Cid-Anna-H-Hunt---.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NRHP list and Wikimania in DC next year

Dear Slowk,

In your travels around DC getting photos for the public art lists could you stay on the look-out for NRHP sites? There is even some overlap with DC Revolutionary Statuary and DC Civil War Statuary being listed as NRHP "sites."

Since Wikimania will be in Washington, DC next August, I'd like to get the List of RHPs in DC table completed by then, as a present to all the visitors. I made a general proposal/invitation at

Talk:National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Washington,_D.C.#Wikimania_in_DC

Please take a look and any help would be appreciated.

Smallbones (talk) 17:27, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

count me in, pleasure to meet you at AAA. already did some overlap from List of diplomatic missions in Washington, D.C. i can fill in red links with stubs to start with. i note there are 588 listings on NHR DC. [17] Slowking4: 7@1|x 17:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Hayes

Thank you for your help with my father's entry. Sincerely, David M. Hayes.

Cuban Friendship Urn

Your additional source impressed me so much that I ended up expanding the article and nominating it at DYK. With such radically different versions of he story from two different reliable sources, I think it's best for the article to tell both stories, rather than choosing one. I'd still love for the article to be able to say that it was once voted DC's most obscure memorial, but the source doesn't give enough details to make me comfortable with that statement.

See Template:Did you know nominations/Cuban Friendship Urn. --Orlady (talk) 23:32, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Crazy-horse-comparison.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Crazy-horse-comparison.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:41, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Crazy-horse-comparison.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Crazy-horse-comparison.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:41, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the work on the DC NRHPs. I've finally got the new split of the lists (almost) done. Please don't burn yourself out on this - we've got 50 weeks left before Wikimania! and other folks will join in as we go.

Thanks again.

Smallbones (talk) 22:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NARA backstage pass

I am blogging about our event at the National Archives. Let me know if you'd like me to use your real name or your account name in picture captions, or if you'd rather be left unmentioned. The text of the draft blog post is at User:Dominic/Backstage Pass; feel free to make edits or suggestions. Dominic·t 20:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sky-landscape-left.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Sky-landscape-left.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hi, and thanks for all your Wikiwork. You do realize that you're supposed to enter a summary explanation of your edits each time? It makes it easier for us other editors to follow and update your work. Thanks, PRRfan (talk) 02:37, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

after this: Replacing this image will result in a vandalism warning [18]; and my response warn someone who cares [19], i can have no confidence in the WP:ES, edit summary "essay". Slowking4: 7@1|x 15:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's annoying. But it would still be nice to have your edit summaries. PRRfan (talk) 17:48, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mem U Zin-2.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mem U Zin-2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:56, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:IwoJimaMemArlington-2.jpg

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:IwoJimaMemArlington-2.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:08, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:IwoJimaMemArlington-2.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:IwoJimaMemArlington-2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It might take some imagination

but look at Nell's arm and Chuck's leg Google Street View blown up

And, yes, Kumioko wanted to include a contributing property into the main NRHP list. He also had a DC neighborhood question, which I am not qualified to answer, but I think he worked it out. Smallbones (talk) 15:15, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check out File:Rhodes-tavern-south.jpg, I took a couple of extra steps on it. It's a bit hard to explain unless you have a Mac, but the basics are get the biggest (tif) version, import to iPhoto, trim the black edge (but just the black edge) then EXPORT the photo into another folder to upload, using the max quality, jpg setting. A couple of folks at WP:NRHP used to do this to me all the time. Black edges are a NRHP faux pas. Blame User:Nyttend. Smallbones (talk) 01:39, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question for you

I was trying to understand what you meant by 'tagspam' in the discussion at AN/I about the guy who won't leave the other guy's Talkpage alone? Just wondering. -- Avanu (talk) 02:48, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

there are 44 semi-automatic and automatic messages above. this is disruptive. if the standard is two messages per six months is harrassment, then let the interaction bans go forth.

frequency:

Skierdude - 7
CorenSearchBot - 5
DASHBot - 5
N419BH - 4
Fut. Perf. - 4
Ambrust - 3
Courcelles - 3
SchuminWeb - 3
damiens - 2
Ravendrop - 2
Stifle - 2
Hasteur - 1
Jamietw - 1
Levinge - 1
Melesse - 1
Moonriddengirl - 1
Sfan00 IMG - 1
Takeo - 1
TreasuryTag - 1

this is the template i will be using:

Slowking4: 7@1|x 14:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand. I think the other editors aren't quite saying we should define harassment as 2 interactions, but that we should be willing to respect an editor's wishes if they ask to be left alone on their personal Talk page. Perhaps the page ban proposal was premature. -- Avanu (talk) 23:12, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

oh i understanding what they're saying: "buzz off you're bothering me". it cuts both ways, and i look forward to the frisson of the consequences of this decision. Slowking4: 7@1|x 15:26, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Cuban Friendship Urn

On 25 August 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cuban Friendship Urn, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Cuban Friendship Urn monument (pictured) originally stood in Havana, was moved to Washington, DC, in 1928, disappeared around 1959, and was found and re-erected in the 1990s? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cuban Friendship Urn.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011

"please stop leaving wrongful notices on my talk page. it is disruptive." That applies to you not myself. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 15:11, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:19, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Slowking4. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 12:42, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Soll Bio

Melissasusan (talk) 02:24, 29 September 2011 (UTC) Regarding biography at Jacob Soll page, he's a professor of mine at Rutgers and he asked me to edit his Wikipedia page. He sent me that bio, which he wrote himself and is probably the same one he wrote for his page at Rutgers. He approved the page itself and its content. So I undid your revision. I appreciate your help, but in this case, he can't violate his own copyright. If you want, I'm sure I can do some sort of reference.[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject desk/Interviews4

I'd think that Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject desk/Interviews4 will be in the SignPost tomorrow. It might cause some additional activity in DC NRHP and Public Art. Smallbones (talk) 17:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One can hope, but we should be realistic! BTW, my prose at Civil War Monuments in Washington, DC could probably use some help. Smallbones (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail, cowboy

I got a few photos in Philly today: 1 NRHP, some skyscrapers, and some public art. Obviously, I'mm getting mixed up cause I can't find my refs. I"ve seen the article before on the sculptor of this. Any idea who it is? Any help appreciated. Smallbones (talk) 00:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this is "Mail Delivery (West -Cowboy - One of Four)" on List of public art in Philadelphia Slowking4: 7@1|x 13:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Over the Top in Elgin, IL
Over the top at 2nd and Spring Garden, Philly

Roughly 200 of these, either by E. M. Viquesney or John Paulding (they had a copyright dispute). Smallbones (talk) 17:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Over the Top weaton, illinois [20]; jersey city new jersey [21]; colfax, nebraska [22]; chicago [23]; buffalo [24]; manitou springs colorado [25]; albany missouri [26]; richland north dakota [27]; ladysmith wisconsin [28]; elgin, illinois [29]; knoxville, tennessee [30] original?; missoula, montana [31]; salem oregon [32]; astoria, oregon [33]. there are two others different sculpture with same name.

Spirit of the American Doughboy list 149, some duplications [34] Slowking4: 7@1|x 13:47, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Fall 2011 Photo Contest

You may be interested in the above WP:NRHP photo contest starting on Oct. 21. For example there is a challenge specifically for Washington, DC NRHP site photos. You might even want to put in your own challenge related to Public Art. A possibility might be:

"A barnstar will be awarded to the photographer who photographs the most examples of public art that are listed on the NRHP or are contributing objects in NRHP-listed historic districts. "Public art" includes statues or other artworks displayed outside. Names and dates of many of these artworks can be verified by searching for the city and state at Smithsonian art inventories. The photos should be included in an NRHP county list, or be included in any other article, e.g. an article you created yourself on a historic district or on a "List of public art in ..."

If you need any help on this, just ask. The only work involved would be verifying the contest winner, which means checking the diffs they provide to make sure they really uploaded the pix and included them in an article.

Thanks for any help.

Smallbones (talk) 16:11, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hmm, did all the easy ones in dc already. Slowking4: 7@1|x 17:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DC

I think the DC lists are ok now. User:Farragutful is going to town and we're down to 33 non-illustrated.

I put in a request at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen.

and got turned down flat for help. So I did a redirect from the old NW quadrant article to the main DC article, put "copied from tags" on the three new NW quadrant articles. History saved, sites all renumbered. Thanks. Smallbones (talk) 02:54, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rock Creek Park

I noticed that you added links to the "main articles" for Peirce Mill and Montrose Park, but those links are just redirects right back to the Rock Creek Park article itself. Please be sure there's actually a separate article before you add links out! Thanks -- JohnInDC (talk) 17:27, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

done Slowking4: 7@1|x 18:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, sorry - didn't mean to get in the middle of your project there! JohnInDC (talk) 20:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no probs, i coulda got lost, but now we will recruit you for NRHP contest. Slowking4: 7@1|x 20:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Already on list

Not sure what you mean "Lothrop Mansion, not on the list. i will wait awhile before inserting in your nice table code." It's number 83 in National Register of Historic Places listings in the upper NW Quadrant of Washington, D. C.. I'll check the unillustrated list - that must be what you mean. BTW user:APK (gone, but not forgotten) really deserves several rounds of applause for his photo work.

Got another WWI doughboy, this time by "none of the above" aka anonymous [35] For the time being he can go into an article on the house behind him, but I'm thinking

He could go into a List of public art in Pennsylvania
A system of public art articles could be set up similar to the system of NRHP listings
- It couldn't include every listing in the country - only those with photos or articles
- A better way of formatting the sources would have to be found
But I don't have the time right now

Just something to think about.

All the best.

Smallbones (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ugh, "doesn't come up to the standard" as "iron mike" indeed. Slowking4: 7@1|x 18:28, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

done World War I Memorial (Berwick, Pennsylvania), an orphan can stay there a while. but i didn't find your NRHP in the database. there are 3 others World War I Memorial Slowking4: 7@1|x 21:34, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

APK

I hadn't got round to removing this page from my watch list, so forgive the tangent - but whatever did happen to APK? I looked around a bit and couldn't figure it out. JohnInDC (talk) 17:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess it was just Wiki-burnout, perhaps combined with the attentions of some of the Wiki-assholes (yes there are a few of these). Smallbones (talk) 18:16, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this is a common cycle, prolific editor has life change, moves on. follow-on editors find trail already blazed. colaboration across time. Slowking4: 7@1|x 18:20, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Silver Medal (Zoological Society of London)

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 Silver Medal (Zoological Society of London), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Jose

Thanks! Great to see it get created.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 21:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Slowking4! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:19, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Interview with Wikimedia Foundation

Hi Slowking, My name is Matthew Roth and I'm a Storyteller working on the 2011 fundraiser with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. In past years, we've relied on Jimbo to carry the bulk of the fundraising weight and he's done very well helping us hit our yearly funding targets. This year, however, we're broadening the scope and reach of the fundraiser by incorporating more voices and different people on the funding banners and appeals that will start running full-time on November 7th. We're testing new messages and finding some really great results with editors and staff members of the Foundation. You can see the current progress of the tests here. I'm curious if you would want to participate in an interview with me as part of this process? The interviews usually last 60 minutes and involve a number of questions about your personal editing experiences, as well as general questions about Wikipedia and its impact in the world. Please let me know by emailing mroth (at) wikimedia.org. Thanks! Matthew (WMF) 22:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Guy Wolynes

I'm posting this message on your talk page because I noticed that you've recently created the new article Peter Guy Wolynes--The headings and sections seem appropriate. It would be great if you could also upload a picture for the related article Lawrence D. Bobo. Jipinghe (talk) 19:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hmm, i note there are no images with the cc-by license such as: wolynes -[36]; Bobo - [37], lots of images with unclear license. wolynes - [38]; Bobo - [39]. maybe an email to UCSD; harvard is in order to follow wp:OTRS process. such is the punctilious wikipedia. Slowking4: 7@1|x 19:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

	Thank you
	Thank you for your work on the article Haleh Ghoreishi. Best Sadrang (talk) 23:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NRHP in DC pix

thanks for the pix. You should join the contest at Wikipedia:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places/Fall_2011_Photo_Contest#Challenge_.233_Washington_DC. I just wanted to clean up the unillustrated list - no need to put the pix there, just remove them from that list. Yes, there are always messy photos with some sites. When shooting for fully illustrated lists, I figure the first 90% of the sites (usually the clean ones) are the "easiest half". But I think it's now about 5%, isn't it? Keep up the good work. Smallbones (talk) 03:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

19/523 = 3.6% BTW Farragutful is getting into the act as well. I suppose this means I better pick up my slack on the redlinks. Smallbones (talk) 03:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think

you just deleted my Standing Woman picture, which is fine. I thought it was better than picture # 2, but then I would since I took it. I ended up there by accident, made some dinky edit and decided to toss in a picture. Thanks for letting me know. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 21:53, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for accusing you of doing what that bot did. And thanks for the Fair Use template to use in the future. There was a time a couple of years ago when I had many pictures removed and chose, in a fit of pouting, to remove a bunch myself. Now I have a more "Oh well" attitude. I believed that I had done the paperwork correctly on the Standing Woman shot, but appearently the bot thought (or what ever they do) otherwise. Life goes on. Carptrash (talk) 17:52, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chatting with you is no bother. Seems to be time better spent than uploading pictures, for example. I did shoot one this morning for the vernacular (aka "folk) section of Territorial Revival architecture that I hope will be a nice shot. Since there is no date on the building I will proclaim it to be pre-1923 and avoid any botwork. I hope. Carptrash (talk) 18:03, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Better make that Territorial architecture, not Revival. Carptrash (talk) 18:27, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

lol, depends on the date. does it look old? oh and proclamations mean nothing, they will "doubt" your copyright, and put burden on you to prove it is PD or they will delete. Slowking4: 7@1|x 18:51, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DNB cleanup

You are doing a sterling job at cleaning up the list at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography/Archive 2#Cite DNB. Today instead of working my way down the list I appear to have been jumping about but that is because I am going through some that have been moved from one name to another and the originals have been deleted. I wanted to make sure that they all were included in the list we are working on.

The most recent one I came across is now at James Dundas, Lord Arniston. When I looked at it I realised that it was one that you had been working on. Rich Farmbrough has an unique way to mark DNB included text, and it is necessary to do a little more editing to get it full cleaned up. You have done the difficult bits the other bits are just a bit of cut and past.

See here:

remove the {{Wikisource}} we don't need it.
add an attribution line ";Attribution" (the ";" at the start of the line makes it bold
CITE DNB need to be replaced with an DNB
replace |author={{DNB footer initials|James McMullen Rigg|J. M. R.}} with |first=James McMullen |last=Rigg
add ws before title= becomes wstitle=
remove (DNB00)|work=Dictionary of National Biography
remove |url=http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dundas,_James_(d.1679)_(DNB00)

What is left looks like this:

* {{DNB |first=James McMullen |last=Rigg |wstitle=Dundas, James (d.1679) |volume=16 |pages=191–192}} Endnotes:

Once that is done the volume=num will automatically set the date to the correct year of publication. This is the year you use in the inline citations, the name comes from the lase=name and then when you click on the citation it will jump to the {{DNB}} line. Try it on James Dundas, Lord Arniston#cite_note-FOOTNOTERigg1888191-0

If what I have said is not clear let me know and I'll discuss it further. I know its a chore and I am really happy that someone else is helping to fix these. Thanks. --PBS (talk) 13:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please excuse me. I am using a small screen and had not see the stuff lower down with the attribution already set. If you want to do it that way then you should still strip out then ignore steps two and three and instead just present the line as:

* {{Cite DNB|ref=harv |first=James McMullen |last=Rigg |wstitle=Dundas, James (d.1679) |volume=16 |pages=191–192}} Endnotes:

You will need to add |ref=harv to {{cite DNB}} or the link between the footnotes and the long citation will not work (it is set automatically in {{DNB}}) -- PBS (talk) 13:21, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the feedback, now that i have examples James Dundas, Lord Arniston, i will use that; dunno why you don't like cite DNB or wikisource though. Slowking4: †@1₭ 18:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Charles prefers to use both, I don't see the point myself as {{DNB}} takes the same parameters as {{Cite DNB}} and {{DNB}} has to be present when text is copied. I use {{Cite DNB}} for articles where information is used but text is not copied. Eg Ernest, Duke of York and Albany which had such a bad DNB article I replaced it with information from the ODNB (you could tell it was bad with the parting shot after a short paragraph "The fact of his existence was scarcely known to the majority of the British nation."!) -- PBS (talk) 12:20, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AWESOME

ACCIDDDDDD!!!!! :) Great seeing you yesterday!! SarahStierch (talk) 17:47, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Hi, normally I would be annoyed by others editing my user space, but in this case, thank you for your help with User:Bearian/Sandbox#Barbette Spaeth! By the way, how did you find out I was working on this BLP? Bearian (talk) 14:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

oops sorry, should have left a note. i think i found it with a google. (i forgot) i wish guggenheim or rome prize would give her something, so we could write article. Slowking4: †@1₭ 15:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:DGG wrote on his talk page that she's "borderline" notable. Bearian (talk) 21:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ah yes, regrettably i agree, but plenty of career time left to acquire baubles. Slowking4: †@1₭ 21:19, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lincoln the Mystic

New at this so thanks for the tips....and for creating above article... and noticing time stamp. I'm really an amateur...Hudconja (talk) 21:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's baaackkk

The WW1 monument will reopen!! yay! SarahStierch (talk) 15:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

darn too late to make my social calender. is it open for mall assignations? Slowking4: †@1₭ 15:35, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Lbninternational

Hello,

I want you to know that I have opened a thread at WP:ANI about this user's edits. Given that Louis Bacon has sued the Wikimedia Foundation in a London court, special attention is required here, in my opinion. Best regards. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:29, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i prefer the dgg method for name violations. given that they self identified, it's not anonymous. let the hedgie sue to his heart's content. Slowking4: †@1₭ 16:43, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

Frank Bonsall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

was linked to University of Newcastle

Werner Wolfgang Rogosinski (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

was linked to University of Newcastle

Any suggestions for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:19, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Public art in LA

Hey thanks for the note! Send me email and let's keep the conversation going: andrew a_t andrewlih d_o_t com. We're working on a database of roughly 900-1000 rows, so it would be great to match up what we're doing with what you have. Also, has anyone in the WIkipedia-verse been working with the industry standards like VRA 4.0 which is used by some museums. -- Fuzheado | Talk 01:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of John Batty

A tag has been placed on John Batty, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

[Mike informs me that everyone including hid Dad and Mum who named him call him Michael]

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agdturner (talk • contribs) 09:54, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

wrongful speedy. if you want to edit an article, do it; do not wipe away the history. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 12:09, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for teaching me about moving a page and preserving the edit history. Sorry I was going about developing the content in the wrong way. I think I have started a workflow for getting out of the mess I've created (by use the copy, paste, delete procedure). I have requested the speedy deletion of the Mike_Batty page (which only I had edited) after pasting back the content from this to the John_Batty page. I will now request the move which I don't think I am authorised to do. Once more, I do apologise for getting this wrong and thanks again for showing me a better way and for developing Wikipedia. Andy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agdturner (talk • contribs) 12:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC) Sorry, I came back to sign this thank you for your patients Agdturner (talk) 12:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of John Batty

A tag has been placed on John Batty, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

[This page has been correctly moved now. Nothing relies on this page and it is unlikely to be used. I think it should go and the person the biography page is about wants it gone.]

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Agdturner (talk) 17:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My main concern with not deleting John Batty (even though it is just a redirect) is that it gets linked to instead of Michael_Batty or Mike Batty. I suppose there can always be someone else come along with any of these same names and request things get moved... Clearly, I was thinking that rationalising at this stage was probably better, but I have no major objection either way. For links sake and because others might look for Mike as John, then you are probably right, I agree to keeping the page as a redirect. If Mike is really bothered about it and gets on to me, I'll suggest he gets to grips with the matter himself. What would be really useful is to have a function to change all links to a page to another. Maybe there is such a thing... Anyway, thanks for your help. It's been good interacting with you. Maybe our paths will cross again before too long. Bye 82.2.214.237 (talk) 02:21, 23 November 2011 (UTC) Agdturner (talk) 02:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

yes, there is, there is the "what links here", and i will scrub that. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 02:28, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't ask how I found this one...duuuddeeeee...

SarahStierch has passed you the Wiki Joint! WikiJoints promote... uh... promote... help with... do... wiki... something... yeah... uh, what was I saying? WikiJoints help promote, uh, wiki stuff...and help with...huh?

"Do not interact with"

I don't know why you have created a section of Wikipedia users to "not interact with", but this is generally not acceptable use of the Wikipedia user space per Wikipedia:User pages: Material that can be viewed as attacking other editors, including the recording of perceived flaws. I don't know what your intent is with that, but similar kinds of lists on Wikipedia have generally been deleted from other editor's user space under the reason I said above. Instead of removing it myself, I am requesting that you remove it from your user space yourself as a sign of good faith. — Moe ε 15:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i was waiting for the wiki-drama of the projected attack. no, this is merely a reminder to me not to interact with these people, per my self-imposed interaction ban. i will now add you to the list. i would ask you not to interact with me. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 16:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Slowking4, I saw the thread about this on ANI, and just wanted to pop in with a minor clarification and a question. While you can ask other editors to not post on your talk page (though they are still allowed to communicate with you here when necessary, say if they should need to leave appropriate notifications), you can't actually ask that they not interact with you anywhere on Wikipedia. For example, you can't say, "I'm now editing this article, so I don't want anyone on my 'interaction list' editing here either". You can, of course, choose to keep yourself away from any articles they edit on, though as your list grows that may cause more and more limitations for you. So, since this is really just a self-imposed list, would it be possible for you to keep it off of your userpage? That might help alleviate some of the expressed concerns. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:43, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

very well. WP:UP#POLEMIC: Very divisive or offensive material not related to encyclopedia editing it is quite a stretch, to view a bare list as an attack. it is not reasonable, and he had to engage in quite a spectacle of putting words into my mouth. i am offended by his ad hominem attack at ANI. I am requesting that he apologize "as a sign of good faith".

isn't it better to be forthright, so they people understand why i'm not interacting, so that they can spare themselves: "What worries me more at the moment is the lack of any reaction to this section,... but when a number of people raise some points they are concerned about, the least you can do is acknowledge the concern and indicate what you are going to do about it (or why you are not going to do anything about it)"[40] this is an unproductive way of interacting. you noted the paradox of first mover in interaction bans. but what limitations? i am editing largely in article space; to the extent they do not, we are ships passing in the night. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 14:17, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notification

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Slowking4 self-imposed interaction bans. Thank you. rdfox 76 (talk) 17:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

here is the context: Proposed ban of User:Buffs from User talk:Hammersoft, where it was asserted that "It is within the remit of the community to ban a user from any page where there is the potential for disruption". quite a stretch, and stage-setting for drama. the consensus pulled back from the precipice. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 14:31, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

attrition of experienced editors

one is an incident; four is a trend. an editor suggested i take my concerns off editor's talk, so i take them here. i have no brief for any of these four, but we need to consider the rampant incivility shown them, and drama. i have heard it expressed that editors are a dime a dozen, but i believe the 20-70-10 rule applies. if you run off the top 20%, then your average editor quality and productivity declines. we spend too much time mentoring new editors to shrug at their departure. when is it going to stop?. when will we have mandatory admin training? do you prefer to ride this bomb to the target point? the editor trends study is very clear. "Where are the leaders of the land? Where are the swells who run this show?" i'm sure there are admins who are leading teams to address problems, i don't see them, where are they? if you aren't one, then get the hell out of the way. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 00:11, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agnes Martin changes

Thanks for you improvements to the article. However, our Manual of Style specifies that only dates, not places of birth and death, go in the parenthetical in the lead sentence. Also, per our external links policy, blog posts may not be included in the External links section. Yworo (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sorry you're wrong, EL in accordance with policy. Wikipedia:External links:

"Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues";
"There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page ";
avoid: "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority." Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 21:40, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
and not specifies that only dates, not places of birth and death, go in the parenthetical in the lead sentence, rather "Birth and death places should be mentioned in the body if known, and in the lead if they are relevant to the person's notability." Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies. this is contrary to a lot of articles, so good luck with that. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 18:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Musician's infoboxes

I am not certain what point you are trying to make. When I first began editing here in 2006-7 I recall vividly that the infobox for Elvis Presley was a model for those infoboxes when the person is a musician. Musician's biographies have been my specialty for some time- as well as finding, uploading, and placing photos in Commons for use in all language Wikipedias. With perhaps two issues with other editors here, I've worked on well over 3,000 separate articles here without complaint. Generally, I am the one who has to add the infoboxes and photos on the majority of them. So, which edit put this bee in your bonnet? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 18:14, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Jamiluddin Aali-2.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Jamiluddin Aali-2.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 or which could be adequately covered with text alone. 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. Armbrust ^{Talk to me about my edits}_review 08:59, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Warren Weinstein

Hello, Slowking4, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warren Weinstein whether the article Warren Weinstein should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Warren Weinstein, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! Template:Z82 v/r - T P 02:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NRHP DC Barnstar

		The NRHP Photo Contest Barnstar
		Awarded for winning the Washington DC challenge in the Fall 2011 NRHP Photo Contest by almost completing the NRHP DC lists Smallbones (talk) 02:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC) [reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for helping me to create Barbette Spaeth. Bearian (talk) 20:22, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Hiram W. Johnson House, you recently added links to the disambiguation pages Progressive Party and Capitol Hill Historic District (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Farmbrough list

		The Biography Barnstar
		Here is a barnstar for your work on the Farmbrough list -- PBS (talk) 00:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to wait until I had finished (in the next couple of days I hope) before awarding you, but on a tangent from my edits to that list, I came across this article (Friedrich Gustav Jakob Henle ) and this edit.

Please do not use {{Wikisource1911Enc Citation}} in is depreciated, instead use either:

{{Cite EB1911|wstitle=Henle, Friedrich Gustav Jakob}}

or

{{1911|wstitle=Henle, Friedrich Gustav Jakob}}

The pair work just like {{Cite DNB}}} and {{DNB}} and take a similar range of parameters. Most 1911 do not have an author so to create a short citation, you can use the editor "Chisholm" {{sfn|Chisholm|1911}}^[1]{{sfn|Chisholm|1911|p=269}}^[2]

Notes

^ Chisholm 1911.
^ Chisholm 1911, p. 269.

Attribution

This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Henle, Friedrich Gustav Jakob". Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 13 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 269.

--PBS (talk) 00:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Named reference tags

As a follow on to the last section. If you create a named reference tag eg<ref name="FOOTNOTESmith200626">Chisholm 1911 v. 13 p. 269</ref> and you want to use it again further down a page. Then do not fill out the body of the reference tag again but simply use the named reference tag with a forward slash at the end:<ref name="FOOTNOTESmith200626"/>. That will create one place in the {{reflist}} with the details as in the first name reference tag to which each same named reference tags will link (See WP:NAMEDREFERENCES) -- PBS (talk) 01:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EB 1911

It was the reason for adding parameters to {{1911}}, and including the hidden categories: Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica

When I have been through the various backlogs, it is my intention to add a warning like I put into {{cite DGRG}}, then in all 10,000 articles there will be ^{article name needed} requesting that an article name is added. Hopefully many hands etc, will fix the problem more quickly than just a few editor working on them.

To help clear the decks ready for such an addition, I have recently been through the backlog removing all the {{Wikisource1911Enc Citation}} because it consisted of either no wstitle= parameter or no parameter at all. They have all been modified to {{cite EB1911}}. The problem was that may of them were replacements of {{1911}} before 1911 took parameters, or added to pages with an existing {{1911}} template. I fixed about 500 of the most blatant errors (where both existed side by side) but if you need something to do :-) you could do worse that start on the category Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica that may need Attribution

Taking the second and third articles in that category (and without a through check:

Rava (amora). No text, nothing to cite from the EB 1911 article, so just remove the parameter "|W1EC=1", (that will removed it from the category as it has been checked)
John Abernethy (minister) this should be attributed. Remove |W1EC=1 add the other parameters to {{1911}} template and add inline citations were appropriate.

etc, etc. at the moment 907 of them a big job! -- PBS (talk) 02:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

eh, compared to the blp hysteria, it's a trifle. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 15:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've made a start. Thank you. Just a couple of points, when you have "fixed" a page please remove the parameter "|W1EC=1" and if the Wikipedia article is in part of wholly copied form EB1911 then replace the "{{Cite EB1911|..." with "{{1911|..." like this -- PBS (talk) 06:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice llama

SarahStierch (talk) 21:30, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PA in PA

I see you ran into my Smith Memorial Arch photos. I'll add them to the List of public art in Philadelphia and probably get a few more PA pix in PA this week. I'm thinking that you, Farragutful and myself should meet at the Spring flower show in DC, and I'll buy you both dinner. In case any 1 or 2 of us breaks a leg, there will be at least one photographer there to snap the carousel. All the best. Smallbones (talk) 14:51, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The carousel list looks good. There will be folks who want to add more, e.g. there's an old carousel from the famous Philadelphia maker in Memorial Hall (Philadelphia) (with the building on the NRHP) and probably many in historic districts as well. A note at WT:NRHP will help populate it. And people will want to add even non-historic carousels (I spent an hour snapping pix in town in Ohio only to find that the c was new). There may be other carousel lists already though. You might use List of Masonic buildings in the United States as a guide, some of this can get snippy as folks debate the limits of the list. I'd have columns in the table for coords, builder, dates, and maybe "animals and ...." All the best. Smallbones (talk) 15:27, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

when i get back to table building mood, i will revisit. would make a nice see also for carousel article. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 17:35, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I never counted the DC pix but thought it was more or less tied. Nevertheless you were the only one who actually entered the contest: I always try to follow the rules precisely, so you won and it was well-deserved. I also feel free to go beyond the rules where necessary, so Farragutful also got a well-deserved barnstar. BTW, I kinda feel that I've manipulated you guys since I haven't taken too many DC pix or filled in many red links (yet). Please allow me to salve my conscience, by buying both of you dinner after we gang photograph the once a year carousel. Smallbones (talk) 18:47, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

let's do a meet up; can we invite sarah? she's on her own tab though (lush) Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 18:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. I'll double check the date, invite the three of you, and might even buy Sarah a drink or three. You or Farragutful can pick the place (somewhere between tavern-style to not-so-fancy French). Smallbones (talk) 19:07, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

keep in mind that the cathedral is a little hike from the metro, all the good restaurants are in georgetown down the hill a mile. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 19:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i forgot they have food vendors there, polish kielbasa? charging for the tower climb? wahts the would coming to. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 20:03, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Your esteemed presence is requested at the Spring Flower Mart for a photography session of the NRHP-listed All Hallows Guild’s antique carousel [42] sometime on May 4, 2012 10 AM - 6 PM or May 5th, 2012 10 AM - 5 PM [43] (final date and time to be determined) at the National Cathedral. As long as we get the carousel photos, I'm buying dinner and a taxi to Georgetown. RSVP. Smallbones (talk) 19:51, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alder Rock

Hi, arguing that something else is more notable does not lessen the notability of another place. Incorporated townships are almost always notable, and I am of the opinion that even underpopulated places can be notable. Bearian (talk) 16:05, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stub tagging

Please make sure that you only tag sub articles as stubs. Holt House (Washington, D.C.) is not a stub. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for bringing that article to my attention, if you don;t believe it's a stub, you might want to assess it on the article talk page. While Holt House is one of the great country-style estates built during the early years of the new Federal City, it remains a mystery as to who built it and when. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 14:14, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let the games begin

Another public artwork up for nomination. This time they want to do a mass deletion of all the rock creek pieces. I hate to be rude, but, I am getting very frustrated with folks who are unaware about art history and art notability doing this. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnson Memorial. There are already lists for this material, and to say one wants to delete the Frederick Keep Memorial makes my heart hurt. SarahStierch (talk) 13:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To-do list for Saturday

Feel free to add to it, these are artists who need articles or whose articles need work from the photo collection. There is a section at the bottom for "other subjects". Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 26/To-do list SarahStierch (talk) 14:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

got a stub for virginia dehn. moving from bottom to top of SI list. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 17:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added an outcomes section on that page, so please add there =) SarahStierch (talk) 17:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		Red Link Removal Barnstar
		I, SarahStierch, hereby award you, Slowking4, the Red Link Removal Barnstar for your awesome work at turning red links blue, including at tonight's edit-a-thon! Great work friend! SarahStierch (talk) 02:04, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Glenkiln-title.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Glenkiln-title.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

you are wrong. ~~i am the source and it is clearly tagged that way, please do not tag images if you do not understand derivative works.~~ Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 14:45, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You were NOT identified as the source when it was tagged. Sfan00 IMG (talk)

you are correct, sorry about that. a shrug-able deletion. i see ronhjones changed the cc0 self to pd text here [44], better to fix than delete. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 19:18, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Creative Commons Photo's of Copyright works

I've updated the licensing info here [[45]] to reflect that although the PHOTO is {{CC-BY-3.0}}, it can only be provided under 'fair-use' terms because it's subject is a copyright artwork.

This was the wording/approach I was planning on using for simmilar cases from now on. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok, there are 1258 of the "non-free 3D", some with dual licenses. maybe some discussion at Template talk:Non-free 3D art, and wp:nfcc is in order. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 19:24, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See {{Photo of art}}, the wording of that is what would need to be disscussed. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this is all very new and innovative, is there consensus, and then standards of use so people know it's there? we definitely need an image license wizard, or drop down, or even style guide, of all the desired boxes. Category:Non-free Wikipedia file copyright tags; implementation team, how many thousands have the wrong tag, for example [46]. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 13:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I created {{Photo_of_art}} myself to meet a particular issue, and re-worked it after some concerns were raised. As such it's a very new template, perhaps based on it's current usage, you'd like to document? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this is worth an rfc, and if you don't want to, i'll get around to it. i try to comply with policy, not make it. less drama. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 16:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to start an RFC on this , also have a word with User:Postdlf whose provided an even better wording for the template concerned, At present {{Photo of art}} makes the distinction between the photo and it's subject a lot clearer, which I hope you will agree is FAR better for contributors. The issue of these images showing up in 'free-media' categories is still unresolved, but that's a far more minor technical issue. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:36, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas Gough

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Douglas Gough, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/224272/enlarge.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:11, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

a twelve word match (five consecutive) is a copyright vio, when the people and dates are different? [47] this kind of false positive tends to undermine the credibility of the bot. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 20:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Olds

Hello,

Thanks for your Elizabeth Olds article. The references and external links were bare URLs, so I did an example of a citation and an external link for you. When that is done, we can remove the "bare links" template. Best of luck!--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jarrell

Heya - would you mind doing what you just did for Nevelson to the Wadsworth Jarrell article? It was merged recently and it went to hell and I removed the content added to it. Pretty please? :) SarahStierch (talk) 09:35, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok, what a mess. i see a better article on AfriCOBRA. i forgot what i did to nevelson; you wrote the thing; images? o see my one image got deleted, non free not critical commentary. i don't see any google images with right license; no flickr.

there's a fundamental problem of working with heritage material. when are we gonna get some editors rather than taggers. i sure hope the leaders aint us. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 13:56, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You did something with "best version?" A template you added to the talk page. SarahStierch (talk) 17:06, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ooh ok, yes i stole that from User_talk:Rich_Farmbrough/Archive/2011Dec#The_stable_version_template; this should be added to all good articles, may be a solution for quality rot. pick which project you were working for that assessed, is AAA ok? Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 17:38, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for barnstar, have you tried Zotero yet?

Hey, thanks for the barnstar. Next meetup let me show you Zotero, it makes webpage references way quicker. And thanks for getting all those articles going! Djembayz (talk) 03:31, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ooh thanks, looks better than chrome. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 03:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Salager

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Annie Salager, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://perso.numericable.fr/asalager/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

list of works not copyright vio. look to french wikipedia first. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 15:18, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Embassies of South Sudan and Vietnam

Hi. I saw you reverted my edits so I wanted to explain my reasoning. I am against linking back to the Embassy of Vietnam because the two countries having offices in the same building is an extremely tangential relationship. To link back to the article like that gives readers (including me) the impression that the South Sudanese Embassy is housed within the Embassy of Vietnam (as if it were a protecting power or had some other relationship). To let that reference stand, we might as well include the same information on the articles for the National Association for Business Economics, the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, the College Board's D.C. office, etc. They're all located in the same office building as the South Sudanese and Vietnamese embassies.

As for the suite numbers, they are not included on any other entries and I am opposed to including them per WP:DIRECTORY, including the street addresses in pushing the policy enough as it is. Best, epicAdam^(talk) 20:07, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok, the model would be something like House of Sweden, or Caribbean Chancery in Washington, D.C. so move / redirect the embassy vietnam to the new article generic office which happens to house 2 embassies. the suite number was an attempt to indicate they are not protecting. should have took the picture, but it is ugly. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 20:24, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

make that Lion Building, per [48]

i dunno about the street addresses including suite. how else would you find it on the map, and check the gps. you could take it off the list and keep in articles, but what encyclopedic purpose would that serve. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 20:28, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok, done. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 19:48, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:Crazy Horse Memorial 2010-2.jpg

I didn't think that the content I deleted (hi my name is dan maughan i am 25 years old i am a builder with 10years experiance and much of that being in stonework i would like to travel to south decota to work on crazy horse who do i talk to to get info on it and how do i contact them thanks) was a useful discussion of the image Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:47, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October NARA scanathon

Hi, you attended the scanathon at the National Archives in October. I recently noticed that most participants have yet to upload scanned documents to Commons, so I just wanted to check and see if you have any files to upload. Please use the October 2011 NARA Backstage Pass category when uploading (and tag any files you already uploaded without it) so we can track them. Any documents you upload will also cataloged by NARA, as well as being available for Wikimedians to use, so this is important! Also, if you have any photos from the tour or other aspects of the event, please be sure to upload those as well. Thanks! Dominic·t 20:14, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i just put the white gloves on, didnt upload anything. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 20:26, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I just spammed everyone with this message since I wasn't sure who did what. :-) Dominic·t 20:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:LogoVilleKhouribga2.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:LogoVilleKhouribga2.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or provided a license tag. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, select the appropriate license tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you can't find a suitable license tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:07, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Iroquois-di-suvero.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Iroquois-di-suvero.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 or which could be adequately covered with text alone. 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. Eeekster (talk) 03:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found = impossible if you delete, i will dispute and upload again. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 03:48, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:800px-Occidental Avenue South (Seattle, Washington).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:800px-Occidental Avenue South (Seattle, Washington).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 or which could be adequately covered with text alone. 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. Eeekster (talk) 03:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

wrong tag, in strict accordance with NFCC. no freedom of panorama US. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 15:28, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:376px-Honuswagnerstatue.JPG

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:376px-Honuswagnerstatue.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

done. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 15:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Doubleascension.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Doubleascension.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Eeekster (talk) 03:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

wrongful speedy. you do of course understand that there is no freedom of panorama in the US, and there can be no free alternative? Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 03:59, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Section of Painting and Sculpture

Hey Slow,

You probably know that one of my main hangups with the Public Art lists is the difficulty of finding "modern" works with free copyrights. I just ran into the Section of Painting and Sculpture and see that there were 1300 Post Office mural created under the program, perhaps more with other depression era WPA type projects. BTW my link was from my photos of File:WPA Dohanos CA PO USVI 1.JPG and File:WPA Dohanos CA PO USV! 2.JPG. As far as you know, are these freely-licensed, e.g. public domain? I think Sarah has done something along these lines, so I'll ask her too.

Happy New Year!

Smallbones (talk) 17:58, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i believe they are, if the artist was on Federal salary. similar to Ansel Adams work at NARA, [49] which has a {{self|PD-USGov-NPS}}. however, getting the photo with license is hard, and don't speak of the SI scans with NC, ND. now where did i put that "PD-USGov-FAP"? Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 18:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok i put "PD-USGov-WPA" on it, technically Section of Painting and Sculpture (post office) was different, but dont't see a FAP yet (maybe use treasury?). Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 18:49, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Smallbones (talk) 19:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

as you may know, there are some websites of lists of post office art, many thumbnails with bad photos. when you get tired of exteriors, try the interior. and there are some controversies, about the "Indians", and "violence". Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 19:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to check out Mail Delivery (Amateis). If you can find any references about racial profiling, please include them, but I might be more inclined to expect this type of thing as a minor distraction. Smallbones (talk) 17:12, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

that's pretty good. it might be a candidate for a combined image in infobox 4 way. hey i will take any controversy, or evolving standard of pc-ness, as a point towards notability Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 17:18, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

photos of post office murals, at low res, NC. tsk, tsk. [50]; contact in arlington. [51]

Miami High recovers ‘lost’ WPA mural
Columbus Burkhart Murals
8 WPA Murals by Carl Peters
WPA mural tour to launch June events WPA 2.0: a brand new deal
Harlem Hospital Murals Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 18:20, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Norwalk's Collection of WPA Murals
Restored WPA-era mural, painted over twice in the past "In one GSA account, the agency states that the murals were first painted over “after almost 20 years of complaints about the murals’ graphic images.”"
`The Hana Brief' Leads To Lost Wpa Murals, "Just last week, parents at Hatch School in Oak Park demanded that two WPA murals, depicting blacks as slaves, be removed"
controversy " The statement summarizes Mr. Dermody's rejection of the four designs in the following way: Too much Negro subject matter. Negroes may not form the greater part of the Community twenty-five years hence. The Negroes in the community would object to Negro subject matter in murals. His hospital is not a Negro Hospital therefore why should it be singled out for treatment with Negro subject matter?"
wpa san fran "These murals caused a great deal of controversy and were the focus of a Congressional investigation for anti-American content. Refregier painted out several offensive parts of his panels to appease the US government and public."
"I didn't think people should see a lynching as part of the court system," Schroeder said. "I thought the flags would cover them nicely, and they would not be the first things people saw." [52]
"Last week, LePage ordered a mural taken down from the lobby of the Department of Labor, arguing that it was hostile to businesses and showed just one side of the state's history." [53]
“Give us the Unity of an and we shall build a New World.” It was not popular. The school board felt it was “communistic in character” and “sinister” and wanted it painted over. [54]
“We run a very tight ship in terms of behavior,” said Damaris Rau, the principal of the Hamilton Avenue school. “How can I then have a mural that depicts guns and knives, when I don’t accept that from my own children?” [55]; [56]
List of WPA mural controversies. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 21:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for saving the photograph

Thanks also for the information about public art photos. I enjoyed reading your favorite quotes. Visitor7 (talk) 20:25, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sure thing. the rules are arcane, and gamed a lot. i don't know about favorite, some go a bit too far; but i find them interesting, and of some import to the work here. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 00:16, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Austin (translator)

If you look at the opening of the third section, you will see that the paragraphs or the sections have got jumbled at some point. Try as I could, I couldn't see what book was being referred to or what to do next. HNY Bmcln1 (talk) 11:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

cut and paste from dnb, paragraphs breaks are different. added title, needs a rewrite. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 14:11, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Public art and copyrights in the US

Preliminary research posted by WMF legal team - this is not legal advice, but, it's helpful! Public art and copyrights in the US SarahStierch (talk) 16:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

excellent, now we can cease the amateur legal thrashing, and get to implementation. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 16:18, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A quick reading of this suggests that all public art displayed outdoors (or otherwise openly) before 1978 is PD, unless you can see a copyright notice. The only quirk I can see is if a statue was moved, what could have been a visible copyright notice, might now not be visible. Note that SIRIS also notes copyright notices when they are visibly displayed.

Perhaps a workable rule would be that experienced editors who take their own photos need to check for a visible copyright notice and whether the statue has been moved, as well as the SIRIS database for a copyright. If all is ok, then they can upload photos of the work. Could we get input on this - perhaps at Commons or WP:Copyright questions, or a special tag? Smallbones (talk) 16:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i happily drop my cavil, about public art no notice. i noticed that a siris without a copyright notice, is prevailing at deletion discussion. for example [57] yes, we need to build a consensus of what the standard tagging should be. both non free don't migrate to commons, and free no notice. we can now point to legal team "guidance" in the tag.

missed you all at scanaganza yesterday, dominic got some good suffragettes, and i got some good girrrrl welders. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 16:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar. I was a bit disappointed myself in the photo - clearly the best place to snap the Cowboy would be from the middle of Kelly Drive (similar to Rock Creek Drive in DC) during the afternoon rush hour (statue faces west). Maybe I'll try again some Sunday. A little snow or greenery might also help. Perhaps this is worth a go at a DYK after I get about 10 other things done.

I am excited about being able to take photos of pre-1978 (with no visible copyright) statues. Sooner or later, I'll probably import your whole Philadelphia list, and figure out the "perfect" formatting. What about the order of the listings - maybe alphabetical on the subject's last name or otherwise on first major word (e.g. not "The")? BTW, I liked the nearby Jacques Lichitz sculpture "Enterprise" a lot better as well as the US Grant equestrian. Smallbones (talk) 17:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i already put it in Sculpture of the United States. i kinda alphabetized by work name? (with siris names ugh) but made sortable so you could get artist also. i'm going to be sidetracked uploading all this nara scan stuff for a while. nice lipchitz, underappreciated modernist Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 17:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is needed on the SOPA initiative

Hi Slowking4,

You are receiving this message either because you expressed an opinion about the proposed SOPA blackout before full blackout and soft blackout were adequately differentiated, or because you expressed general support without specifying a preference. Please ensure that your voice is heard by clarifying your position accordingly.

Thank you.

Message delivered as per request on ANI. -- The Helpful Bot 16:43, 14 January 2012 (UTC) [reply]

A cookie for you!

Thank you so much for my Socratic barnstar. It made my week. It really means a lot for the Wikipedia community to back me up in my ramblings. Enjoy this cookie & I look forward to meeting you at GLAMcamp soon! LoriLee (talk) 19:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Philippe (WMF) (talk • contribs) lol, maybe a warning is in order per User:Georgiasouthernlynn Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 23:55, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Film festival

Please see my response to you at the AfD, and the film festival's Wikipedia article. It's not a major festival; it's actually basically a scam. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:34, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Article!

I noticed you created a page for my grandfather Allan Hay! Might I ask how you figured out his existence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.67.125.100 (talk) 06:19, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure, what did you have in mind? There are a few books I could pull some solid information from for the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.137.18.176 (talk) 02:50, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

well, i could incorporate some of the information in the oral history, but that only goes to 1986. anything after that would be nice. keep in mind you want to use references, not necessarily what you know. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 02:56, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that makes sense, it has to be credible. If you wanted to add some of the information from the oral history, that would be greatly appreciated. There are a few books on General Electric's history where he gets some moderate recognition, I was thinking of adding that if I can find the books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.137.18.176 (talk) 03:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

excellent. check out the Template:Cite book for reference format. (basically page number). signing up for an account would be helpful. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 03:27, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jumeira Mosque images are free on the English Wikipedia

Please do not add non-free content templates to File:Jumeira Mosque Dubai-2.jpg, since the images is free on the English Wikipedia. The reasons why are a little complicated, but in short, Wikipedia:Non-US copyrights mandates that only US copyrights are relevant on the English Wikipedia. This is different from Wikimedia Commons, which requires content to be free both in the US and in the country of origin (in this case the UAE). Under US copyright law, buildings have freedom of panorama, while in the UAE they don't, meaning that pictures of UAE buildings are free under US law but not under UAE law. This means that such content is free on the English Wikipedia but not on Commons. Hence, File:Jumeira Mosque Dubai-2.jpg should be licensed as free here, but should not be transferred to Commons. CT Cooper · talk 14:28, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded on my talk page. CT Cooper · talk 14:42, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Les UX, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pantheon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Slowking4. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 January 27.
Message added 23:55, 27 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stefan2 (talk) 23:55, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

72nd Pennsylvania Monument

I had started a discussion about the Gettysburg monuments on this page here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Category:Gettysburg Battlefield memorials and monuments. I had waited a few days to see if anyone objected; since no one did, I had thought that it would have been fine. Sorry if I caused any problems. Perhaps you could add your view to the discussion there as well. Thanks. Wild Wolf (talk) 03:33, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the notice will respond there. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 04:21, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Title

Hi Slowking!!! Thanks for "userfying" my page about April Masini. I wanted to ask you how I can get the page title to only have her name and not 'User:Gmhayes4/April Masini?' I missed a step in this process obviously. Thank you very much!--Gmhayes4 (talk) 21:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP Poetry

Heya, someone has expressed interest in Women's History Month but is looking to brainstorm. Perhaps you'll have some ideas? Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Poetry#WikiWomen.27s_History_Month Thanks for looking :) SarahStierch (talk) 03:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ok, made my list suggestions. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 03:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removing copyvios

Please be more careful when removing the "copyvio" tag from articles. While the situation on Nathan Francis Mossell may be debatable, as it is close paraphrasing of a copyrighted source, the situation on Wallace House (Somerville, New Jersey) is a very clear copyright violation. You checked with the first link I provided, not with the corrected one. You could just have used the actual article and the duplication detector, instead of the one you put on the article talk page, which was the wrong one. Finally, on the Van Liew-Suydam House, it seems that you relied too much on the tool and not enough on actually comparing the sources. I have reinstated the three copyvio tags on these pages. Fram (talk) 08:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i do not understand, if you want me to do your work you need to provide the proper links. why don't you blank half of the wiki since that's how prevalent the copyright vios are. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 13:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want you to do my work, I didn't create these copyvio's, I an noting those that I find from a very long and time-consuming copyright investigation. Furthermore, I did provide the correct link, and I don't get why you compared the page to another link I first gave in error, and not to the correct link I gave immediately afterwards and which was the "live" link at the time of your comparison. And the "wrong" link only counts for one of those three (or four, I reinstated another one as well). It's great that you want to help with cleaning up copyvios, but removing the warnings while the article is still a copyright violation is actually counterproductive, and doing this wrong on four of the five pages is rather alarming. Fram (talk) 13:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it's not great any longer. have a nice time with your "work". Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 14:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you even check your edits? You have again removed the copyvio indication from Wallace House (Somerville, New Jersey), after rewriting some of it. Have you actually checked if that rewrite did remove the copyvio issues? Let's look at the first paragraph of the article in the state you left it:

Current article	source
Jacob Rutsen Hardenbergh sold 95 acres (380,000 m2) of land, and a small farmhouse to John Wallace, a Philadelphia fabric importer and merchant. Between 1775 and 1776, Wallace purchased an additional 12 acres (49,000 m2) of land, and built the eight-room Georgian mansion. Hew called the estate "Hope Farm," Wallace intended the property to be his place of retirement.	Jacob Hardenbergh sold 95 acres of land and a small farmhouse to John Wallace, a Philadelphia fabric importer and merchant. Between 1775 and 1776, Wallace purchased an additional 12 acres of land and built an eight-room Georgian style mansion adjoining part of the existing farmhouse. It was the largest house built in New Jersey during the Revolutionary War. Naming his estate "Hope Farm," Wallace intended the property to be his country seat and place of retirement.

Fram (talk) 14:34, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

since you don't provide the tools to preview, it's a crapshoot as to how far the paraphrasing limbo iteration goes. or should i say turkey shoot: you maintain the battleground atmosphere, because it suits you. you'll excuse me, while i get some real work done. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 15:00, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have exactly the same tools you have for this, nothing more. I just copy the "copyvio" template from the article into the new version of the article, hit preview, and hit "duplication detector" (if I am lazy), or read the article and the supposed source side by side. This isn't easy or fast work, but I don't use any tool you don't have. As for "battleground atmosphere", you are removing copyvio tags from articles, but they are still clear copyright violations. This can happen, but four times out of five, and then once again when you know that it gets checked and you had it wrong the first time already? It's not a crapshoot, it's just very crappy work you did, and if you don't plan to raise your standards it would indeed be a lot better if you left copyright violation cleanup well alone, since you are creating more work, not less. Fram (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for the feedback. since you're so good at it, i leave you to it. i can be more productive elsewhere. i submit to you that the copyright problem continues to grow, because you do not have a system to fix it; you prefer to play gotcha - very dysfunctional. it's unclear if the copyvios you found are from identifiable sources at higher or lower rate than that shot through the entire wiki randomly. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 15:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Edith Barretto Stevens Parsons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Earle Fraser (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:451px-Escudo legal de Panamá 2.jpg

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:451px-Escudo legal de Panamá 2.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:30, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Calvin Albert

Hello Slowking4,

Thanks for your article on Calvin Albert. I've been trying to track down his estate for the Brooklyn Museum copyright project and the exact death date is a good clue. I'm curious how the "2007 deaths" pages work and thought you might be willing to point me to some information about those pages -- I'm hoping to track back to an obituary, but it's not clear to me where the bot gets the entries.

I've been in touch with some of his former colleagues at Pratt Institute and learned that he retired to Surfside, FL, but that would have to be verified before adding it to the article, correct?

Thanks! Dwythe (talk) 15:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hi i responded on your talk, the "2007 deaths", is merely a category to allow sorts by dod, which is used sometimes for PD 70 years after. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 16:07, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks Slowking4! Lots to learn on/about Wikipedia. I appreciate your help, here & on my talk page. Dwythe (talk) 00:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pavel 183

I've added his name in Russian to the article you're starting, along with his birthdate and place. He claims to have a degree in design, but we'd need an outside source for that. He also says he hates being compared to Banksy. ;) I'll see what else I can find from Russian sources. INeverCry 03:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, marginal notability, if could find the bbc report, then there would be 2 reliable, so good to go. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭

This? INeverCry 04:17, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

found it, think i'll move over now, but needs work. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 04:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC piece says that Banksy's works sell for 100s of thousands of $, not Pavel 183's.

I'll put something together for this article soon.--INeverCry 05:21, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

L'Essor (artist group)

When you translate an article (or part of an article) from another Wikipedia language version, like you did at L'Essor (artist group), you should attribute it to that article, in an edit summary and at the talk page of the article. I have added the necessary template at Talk:L'Essor (artist group). See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Translating from other language Wikimedia Projects for more info on this. (Note: I don't normally follow your edits, I noticed it through your change at Les XX, an article I largely expanded in 2009 and which is on my watchlist since). Fram (talk) 07:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i prefer crediting references on the article page under external links just like any other wiki reference. this template on the talk page is not consistent with Wikipedia:Citing sources, nor is it consistently applied. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 15:11, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An external link is not sufficient though, it is not even a reference. And citing sources isn't really relevant: you aren't citing it, you are plagiarizing it. If you don't believe me, please take it up at Wikipedia:Copyright problems or its talk page, or discuss it with some other editors experienced in our copyright and plagiarism rules. Fram (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

translating is not plagiarism. there are thousands of articles credited just as i did. i believe you; i don't believe "copyright problems" have changed to a transparent solution. when they changed to the current dogma, they failed to roll out the implementation. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 15:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Matthew Ward

Snowking, this article does not contain any text from the 1911 EB, it just footnotes it as a source of information. That's a completely different matter. By adding the templates you are using you are creating the false impression that it is using the actual text of the out of copyright enclyclopedia. Sure, many articles do use passages from the 1911EB verbatim, but this one does not. Paul B (talk) 18:55, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no, when it is a reference then i use {{Cite EB1911|wstitle= }}, when it is copypasted then i use {{1911|wstitle= }}. this is per Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911. if you find it confusing, take it up with Template talk:Cite EB1911. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 19:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, the code you are using incorporates into the article a passage which asserts "Attribution Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Ward, Edward Matthew". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press". This implies that the text of the article itself is somehow to be attributed to the 1911EB. This is what is misleading. There is no reason to use a special code for this source, which is simply cited like any other source. One may as well have "Attribution...." for any other source that is quoted appended to the notes of the article as a whole. The code creates a misleading impression. Paul B (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you take the trouble to read the category description you link to you will see that it says "This category is for Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica which may not been properly attributed as required by the plagiarism guideline." As I stated above, this is not the case, so it is not appropriate to use it. If you find it confusing, take it up with Template talk:Cite EB1911. Paul B (talk) 19:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I should have read further, but I think it does need to be taken up as the code creastes a completely false impression. The confusion is what the instructions themselves involve. Paul B (talk) 20:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see talk:Edward Matthew Ward and this edit. -- PBS (talk) 22:55, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whether to use:

Attribtution

{{1911}}

or just

{{Cite EB1911}}

depends on whether the Wikipedia article incorporates text from the EB article. The instructions are laid out in Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica that may need Attribution. I will edit the category instructions to try to make it clearer -- PBS (talk)

BTW I prefer the style of citations you used in the article Edward Matthew Ward, but if another editor objects then to save time I suggest you go with whatever method they prefer. -- PBS (talk) 23:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also I see you have had several other reasons to compare text between two articles I find duplicationdetector useful for doing this. See this link for an example. -- PBS (talk) 23:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Real Life Barnstar
	Hey Slowking, old buddy, old pal. Thanks for participating this week - and for being my DC Wiki Pal. SarahStierch (talk) 01:36, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Valentine's Day

File:Valentine's Ducks.jpg	Rubber duckies for you
	Happy Valentine's Slowking!!! May this year bring you lots of #WikiLove, as you deserve it! SarahStierch (talk) 19:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Crazy Horse Memorial 2010-2.jpg

⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Crazy Horse Memorial 2010-2.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 07:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AfD and PROD notifications

Hey Slowking. Back in November, you got either an AfD or PROD notification, and it was during one of the template testing project's experiments. If you could go here and leave us some feedback about what you think about the new versions of the templates we tested (there are links to the templates), that would be very useful. (You can also email me at swallingwikimedia.org if you want.) Thanks! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 19:01, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the comments. If you want to stay in the loop on any new developments with these templates, let me know. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NARA

Is there any chance you can do some scanning at the still pictures division at NARA? I have a rather large request at WP:GLAM/NARA/Requests that I'm attempting to work on through alternate venues (emailing around, sending letters to the generals, etc.) but I feel that NARA is the only option for find most of these names. Let me know if you are able to help. Thanks, – Connormah (talk) 04:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i've been meaning to ping dominic about that, return to the generals bio folders. tends to be hit or miss though, it's an alphabetized jumble. the nara insider is on hold, so we may have to wait til next scanathon. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 05:31, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a slight idea of whe the images should be based on a couple that User:BcNARApix got a couple months ago. If I lived closer, I'd do it myself, but unfortunately I don't. Dominic IIRC left NARA in January, so I think we're on our own here. If you (or anyone) could go in and do these for me, (the list can be narrowed slightly) I'd seriously be eternally grateful (I've been trying to do this for a while). Like I said, I've taken baby steps through different venues, but some will just need to be from NARA. Shoot me an email if you are interested/have the time. – Connormah (talk) 06:05, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing most of the photos I want should be in:

Record group: Record Group 342: Records of Airforce Commands, Activities and Organizations (ARC identifier: 654)

Series: Photographs of Air Force Officers and Officials, compiled 1960 - 1981

or

Record group: Record Group 342: Records of Airforce Commands, Activities and Organizations (ARC identifier: 654)

Series: KE: Color Photographs of U.S. Air Force Activities, Facilities, and Personnel, Domestic and Foreign, compiled ca. 1940 - ca. 1980

- you can watch User:Connormah/Generals list for updates to my list. Ping me is you are heading over, I can verify my priorities. – Connormah (talk) 18:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merger of Joseph Wall (British Army officer) and Joseph Wall (colonial administrator)

Hi I noticed you merged the two articles, however per the instructions of Wikipedia:Merging you should have used an edit summary on the target article along the lines of "Merged content from [[<source article>]] to here. See [[Talk:<destination article>#<merger section>]]." Could you please leave a message on Talk:Joseph Wall (colonial administrator) to explain that you have done this? Tim! (talk) 07:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ok done. although when it's a cut and paste from dnb it doesn't add much information. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 13:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Beazley's paint job

File:Uncle Beazley - Paint job - Stierch.jpg :) SarahStierch (talk) 18:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PRINCETON WHAT

Putnam Collection of Sculpture, Princeton University ---- `SarahStierch (talk) 07:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good meeting at the camp

Great meeting you at the GLAMcamp as well. Hope to have some more public art activity soon, and will let you know. -- Fuzheado | Talk 23:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of April Masini for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article April Masini 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/April Masini (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. MisterRichValentine ^(talk) 19:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congressional Cemetery

I cc'd you on an e-mail to the above regarding a possible GLAM project and QR codes. I don't know if anything will come from it, but it is a very interesting place.

I also tried to finish up the DC NRHP photos on Thursday, but didn't get all of them. The Gallinger Hospital should be easy, but I got the wrong building! There's a new listing which I hadn't noticed for a school. The SE 9 boundary marker would require some ropes or maybe mountain-climbing equipment (not to mention the 2 mile one way walk) to get under the I-295 bridge safely, but at least I found a 1907 photo. Consider that one done - or maybe hire a helicopter! I'll be going to get the Carousel early AM on May 4 to get shots without kids in them, and will take care of the odds and ends then. I know that I've put in a few photos under the rule "better some picture than nothing" - if you have anything that you think should be re-taken please note that at Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/unillustrated DC

All the best,

Smallbones (talk) 19:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, there seems to be some progress at List of monuments of the Gettysburg Battlefield Smallbones (talk) 02:14, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sending this message

to all the editors involved in the rapidly expanding List of monuments of the Gettysburg Battlefield. I recently spun off the state monuments for Alabama, North Carolina, Virginia (and intend to do Pennsylvania soon), leaving only a token bit of each in the list. I named these articles to include the name of the battle Alabama State Monument (Gettysburg) because many states have monuments in several battlefields and it seemed that we might as well start preparing for Alabama State Monument (Vicksburg) right now. Someone then re-named those articles (yesterday?) and removed the name of the battle. (they also changed the picture of the North Carolina Monument that I had added that I think much better caught the spirit of Borglum's work, but that is another issue.) Furthermore, there is something really unexplained happening on the talk pages of the new articles, If you click on the TALK tab at, say Virginia Monument (a really lame title, because how many of those are there across America?) you end up at the talk page of the list. What is that about? I would like to redirect these articles back to where they were redirected from yesterday, but unlike the editor who just did it, I'd like to involve all the interested editors. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 17:34, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For your work on William Linnæus Gardner and all those other broken DNB sourced articles PBS (talk) 15:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

5pm Thursday May 3 at the National Cathedral

But 1st you might want to send an encouraging message to User:Ellin Beltz

I don't know if you are still interested, but I'll be meeting with the Spring Flower Show people at the All Hallows Guild Carousel at the above time and place. Please join if you can. Rain date is 9am the following morning, and I may go Friday evening as well to get the carousel in action, with indistinct pictures of kids. I don't like the potential hazards of photographing identifiable kids, so my main thrust will be on the animal figures while the kids aren't there (i.e. Thursday). I also promised you and a couple others dinner - how about that Friday at an old NRHP firehouse in Georgetown, the Vigilant Firehouse (Washington, D.C.)? Smallbones (talk) 15:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Beaz

He's so cool he now has his own category: Commons:Category:Uncle Beazley - SarahStierch (talk) 04:37, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Karen Russell for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Karen Russell 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/Karen Russell until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		Smithsonian Institution Archives Barnstar
		I ,Digitaleffie, would like to thank you for helping newbie wiki editors during the GLAM/SIA project edit-a-thon. --Digitaleffie (talk) 17:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Caching issues

Just so you know, you're not going crazy. The site is experiencing caching issues, so that even after vandalism is removed, you might still see it. Viriditas (talk) 00:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weird Smithson stuff for sorcers

Recipe for tooth powder anyone? [58] Sarah (talk) 03:01, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup

Wikipedia:Meetup/DC_32 Sarah (talk) 15:46, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator sought for the US National Archives WikiProject

Greetings, WikiProject US National Archives member!

We are seeking a coordinator to help reboot the project and work on new initiatives! The role is modeled after other Wikiproject coordinators, like the WikiProject Military History coordinators. The coordinator will work with the Wikipedian in Residence to organize and increase participation in the WikiProject, with the goal that the WikiProject is an active space for collaboration maintained by and for the Wikipedia editors, rather than the National Archives.

Please see the full information at Wikipedia:GLAM/NARA/Coordinator and contact me is you have any questions. Feel free to pass this note along to any interested parties. Thanks! Dominic·t 21:07, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

EduWiki Conference 5-6 September in Leicester, UK

I am writing to you as you have signed up to the Education Meetup at Wikimania 2012 and perhaps are interested in how Wikipedia links to education. Wikimedia UK is now running a education related event that may be of interest to you: the EduWiki Conference on 5-6 September in Leicester. This event will be looking at Wikipedia and related charitable projects in terms of educational practice, including good faith collaboration, open review, and global participation. It's a chance to talk about innovative work in your institution or online community, and shape the future of Wikimedia UK's work in this area!

The conference will be of interest to educators, scholarly societies members, contributors to Wikipedia and other open education projects, and students.

For details please visit the UK Chapter Wiki.

Please feel welcome to register or promote within your network.

Thank you, Daria Cybulska (talk) 16:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be at both, with maybe a little Congressional Cemetery to start with

I was looking for a sign-up sheet for the Baltimore event, but couldn't find it. The Museum page says "anybody can participate" so I think I will. Actually I'm interested in finishing off the some of the NRHP Baltimore sections, but I like public art too! Maybe I'll let somebody know that they could use some QR codes. Do you think the museum could get the city and other permissions needed to post them?

The museum's upload page is interesting - does it go directly to Commons? Do I have to use my real name (maybe first=Small, last=Bones?). The CC0 license is good.

Their map obviously has coords, but the spreadsheet doesn't seem to. If we could download the coords, the Baltimore list of pa would be much easier to construct.

Enough for now!

All the best,

Smallbones (talk) 03:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Logo-of-Archdiocese-of-Tric2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Logo-of-Archdiocese-of-Tric2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:18, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Korean-war-memorial-inge87.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Korean-war-memorial-inge87.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Timeshift9 (2nd nomination)

Hi Slowking4. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 June 5#User:Timeshift9, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Timeshift9 (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 06:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Penn Treaty Park

or more directly File:Penn at PTPark.JPG. Perhaps I'm cutting off his nose to spite his face?

On a more positive note, thanks for all the work on WLM-US and all the photos. I'm actually going to be able to go out today and shoot something! (pix that is) Then I might be able to come back and tell all the uploaders that they can't shoot Frank Gaylord's Korean Vets Memorial on the Mall. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 13:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting history of how close you can get to 1927. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 20:45, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Sky-landscape-center.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sky-landscape-center.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	Thanks for giving me the brilliant idea at the Smithsonian Inistitue edit-a-thon. Geraldshields11 (talk) 17:01, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for You

		Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Smithsonian 2012 Barnstar
		Thank you for your participation in Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Backstage at the Smithsonian Libraries 2012, and for sharing your advice and expertise with our new editors! We are so glad to have met you, and look forward to many more fun GLAM events! -Sarasays (talk) 13:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kwak Pom Gi

Dear User:Slowking4, Please would you voice your opinion on Kwak Pom Gi talk page, wether positive or negative, about my attempt to create more articles about North Korea using actual libary sources instead of just Google? For now, the artices are stubs because the DPRK is a secertive state. My article of Kwak Pom Gi is one such article. I value your honest opinion. Geraldshields11 (talk) 17:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Real Life Barnstar
	You showed up, you gave the talk, you helped new and old(er) users with their editing, you sent everyone barnstars, and you even did a little editing. Thanks! groupuscule (talk) 22:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Slowking, thanks for sending out all those barnstars to GWU editathon participants and for being an excellent teacher yourself. I hope everyone had a good time. I enjoyed scoping the articles people edited :) Lisa N Marrs (talk) 21:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I appreciate your efforts to straighten up Charles Hanlon and improve the NFUR on his photo! -Pete (talk) 23:25, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

including a link to the inevitably grim google image results is useful during discussions. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 23:35, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Slowking4. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Djembayz (talk) 01:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there!

Hello Slowking4! I'm planning our next edit-a-thon at the Smithsonian American Art Museum and would love your help/guidance on what to do to make this a success. I see you are taking a break, but let me know if you are able to help (and no worries if not). It will be on Feb 15 and will be about the Civil War and American Art. Thanks much! bathlander (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:55, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore barnstar

		Baltimore Wikipedia Workshop 2012 Barnstar
		Thank you for your participation in the 2012 Baltimore Wikipedia Workshop! The event was very fruitful, with several people making new accounts and a lot of knowledge being shared. groupuscule (talk) 21:07, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Judy Chicago

Here's one for your watchlist Judy Chicago - a troublesome IP who has been making controversial on other articles, and now they're picking on Judy Chicago. I do have some minor ownership issues (I wrote my thesis on her afterall) so I'm hoping some folks can help me keep an eye on the weird comments and changes they're making so I'm not alone in this. SarahStierch (talk) 18:59, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

HABS White House

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?hh:976:./temp/~ammem_yq6A::

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 21:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ok, i see the first 3 are Albert S. Burns, 1 down 604 to go.

Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 01:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reykjavik's-church.jpg

You uploaded this. Photos of buildings in countries without freedom of panorama for buildings need a free licence combined with {{FoP-USonly|Iceland|2020}}. Do you think that you would be able to obtain a free licence for this photo? --Stefan2 (talk) 18:03, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

absolutely not. this was migrated from commons. deleted here [59] go get the license there. Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 20:52, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So there's probably a free licence in the deleted revisions on Commons, then. Thanks, I'll try to find out. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:39, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

What's up with the signature? Generally it's expected they identify, or relate to the editor using them per Wikipedia_talk:Signatures#Simplifying_signatures NE Ent 23:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

now that you mention it: "There is no consensus for altering the username"... inside comment only visible on talk pages. would you prefer: "Farmbrough's revenge by slowking" ? i'm over at source anyhow. Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 23:39, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Please retract your claims of vandalism on Talk:Anita Sarkeesian. WP:VANDAL lays out exactly and only what vandalism is defined as. For example, you mention POV-pushing...well, WP:VANDAL explicitly says that POV pushing is not vandalism. Neither is any other edit that isn't intended to damage the encyclopedia. Calling edits vandalism when they are not is a form of personal attack, forbidden by WP:NPA. Please retract the statement (striking it out should suffice) and don't engage in further such attacks. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i stand by my comment; i repudiate WP:VANDAL: "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content that compromises the quality of wikipedia. the caveat of "deliberate" is profoundly mistaken. i've had my fill of pure hearts and dirty hands. i simply don't believe he did not "intend" to take away content. actions are facts, and discoverable; motives are inscrutable and undiscoverable. when an experienced editor goes to a controversial BLP and takes away content and makes snarky comments in the edit summary, that's vandalism; if an ip did it, you would call it that. this is not an attack, this is a description of conduct. as far as attacks go, i calibrate my comments based upon the original comments and conduct of the other editor. i get along fine with editors who are doing productive work. i find bullies can dish it out, but they can't take it; (i.e. Wikipedians working towards even enforcement of civility); i will call them the way i see them. Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 23:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to define "vandalism" however you like in your own personal life, but here, like everything else, it's defined by the consensus listed in the guideline. So I'm just putting you on notice that if you continue to use the word inappropriately, you will be blocked for personal attacks. The thing you have to ask yourself is this: "Does the editor's edit have a logic to it, that makes sense, and shows an intent to 'improve' the encyclopedia?" In this case it is clearly obvious that Peter intended to improve the encyclopedia; he just happened to be wrong about how to do that. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

excellent, i look forward to your block, and an equitable enforcement of civility and consensus; start here with the Signpost: Large scale vandalism revealed to be "study" by university researcherFarmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 23:39, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Kingdom of Nepal-arms.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Kingdom of Nepal-arms.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for fixing my user page! ~ Missionedit (talk) 02:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Juan felipe herrera.JPG

A tag has been placed on File:Juan felipe herrera.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:08, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2013

Your recent editing history at Arts on the Line shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Werieth (talk) 00:46, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

you started this edit war not me. i am working with consensus not you. you cannot enforce your false intrepretation of policy against consensus. i look forward to your block as a badge of honor. by deleting images you harm and disrupt the quality of wikipedia. i trust that is your intent. Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 00:52, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

there are multiple editors familiar with NFC that say this is not acceptable. Werieth (talk) 00:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

there are multiple editors on the article talk that say it is acceptable. Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 00:59, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And just as many others including multiple admins that have stated that they are not acceptable (see other comments). Thus consensus for exception has not been met. Werieth (talk) 01:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i don't see multiple admins on article talk, where are they? i don't see substantive arguments that deleting the images will add to the quality of wikipedia. i see argument that rules trump quality. that is not reasonable. Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 01:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both masem and black kite are admins. Werieth (talk) 01:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

excellent, and i see their arguments like yours are the same incompetent cant of "rules mean what i say they mean", out of any stretch of common sense. Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 01:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 60 hours for edit warring, as you did at Arts on the Line. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. — foxj 01:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thank you very much, but you shouldn't imagine that this will resolve the matter. why not make it 6 months? Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 01:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANI discussion notification

I started an ANI discussion that you would be considered an "involved party". - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 01:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article notability notification

Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, Mustapha Salma Ould Sidi Mouloud, has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: "Mustapha Salma Ould Sidi Mouloud" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 02:24, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you for adding the ISBN to Beverly Guy-Sheftall page!

Moyazb (talk) 01:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Gertrude Van Wagenen

On 19 March 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gertrude Van Wagenen, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the research of Gertrude Van Wagenen (pictured) and John McLean Morris led to the development of the morning-after pill? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gertrude Van Wagenen. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!

		Smithsonian American Art Museum barnstar
		Thank you for helping add, edit, and expand content about the Smithsonian American Art Museum! Please enjoy this barnstar. Bathlander (talk) 15:30, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bill of Rights

Hi, you have commented on this article in the past, United States Bill of Rights would you be willing to comment again? Thanks. USchick (talk) 03:39, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC History edit-athon

Hi, Thanks for attending the DC edit-athon at the Historical Society. I know you led the instruction session for the two edit-athons at gwu. We know you'll be there Saturday. Would you be willing to give the same presentation to the participants? Thank you. Looking forward to my first edit-athon. Gwujenking (talk) 13:44, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I really appreciate it. We have a projector. Gwujenking (talk) 13:53, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For your contributions‎...

		Mind the Gap Award
		I hereby present Slowking4 with the Mind the Gap Award for improving biographies of women during WikiWomen's History Month. Keep up the good work! Gobōnobō ⁺ ^c 05:03, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hilda Crosby Standish

On 25 March 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hilda Crosby Standish, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Katharine Hepburn recruited Hilda Crosby Standish to be medical director of the first birth control clinic in Connecticut? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hilda Crosby Standish. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Noticed William White (Bishop of Pennsylvania)

and I thought - he promised to stay away! But as long as you're here see File:JFK Lipchitz Newark NJ 1.JPG It just seems odd and un-Lipchitzian. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 20:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

well, i am sprinkling infoboxes, while adding those miniatures, from SAAM. editathon friday. i see i need to introduce you to the joys of template:artwork in commons, more metadata friendly. i see i'm edit warring with you about the color enamel versus the derivative print, lol. slowking^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 01:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Robert Haszeldine

The article Robert Haszeldine has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTABILITY not asserted

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 06:53, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

another shameful display of ignorance. it doesn't inspire confidence in the deletion process when obvious keeps are proded, circumventing afd. am i going to have to undelete those not on my watchlist? you're not going to get me to improve stubs by threatening deletion. i've done my time fixing blp's, picking up nickels in front of steamrollers.slowking^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 12:15, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

Thanks for your help with all of GLAM/AAA! Sarasays (talk) 14:59, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Some wiki love for you!!

Bathlander (talk) 15:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Usertalk:tjchristensen

Hello Slowking4,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Usertalk:tjchristensen for deletion in response to your request.

If you didn't intend to make such a request and don't want the article to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, ♦ Tentinator ♦ 15:31, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Usertalk:tjchristenson

Hello Slowking4,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Usertalk:tjchristenson for deletion in response to your request.

If you didn't intend to make such a request and don't want the article to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, ♦ Tentinator ♦ 15:31, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, fat finger lack of spacebar. slowking^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 15:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Embassy of Ecuador in Washington, D.C. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Embassy of Ecuador in Washington, D.C. 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/Embassy of Ecuador in Washington, D.C. until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Feedback ^☎ 18:40, 1 April 2013 (UTC) [reply]

geo-locations are not orgs. this systematic deletion of embassies deserves to be discussed as an RfC. sure you want to undo the work of user:aude? slowking^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 22:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Lombardo

Just to let you know, I've put it in articlespace because I'm not waiting three weeks for it. If it doesn't meet the criteria, it can simply be put back.--Laun chba ller 13:26, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, i agree he's notable per discussion; as we know AfC is broken because the reviewers don't know the notability criteria, they would rather tell everybody to wait than coach editors about what is and isn't. waiting for my next visit to library to look at American Composers: A biographical dictionary. using the print sources to support statement in body of bio, would make it a snowball. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 14:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maria-tallchief-mike-theiler.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Maria-tallchief-mike-theiler.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:23, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abdul Jolil.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Abdul Jolil.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:40, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Uncle beazley.jpg needs authorship information

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Uncle beazley.jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|Slowking4}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or use the {{own}} template.

If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:26, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:26, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Lipstick-catepillar.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lipstick-catepillar.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paul J. Achtemeier.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Paul J. Achtemeier.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 16:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arlene Ackerman.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Arlene Ackerman.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 16:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Blaster Al Ackerman.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Blaster Al Ackerman.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 16:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Neil Adcock.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Neil Adcock.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 16:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Qazi Hussain Ahmad.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Qazi Hussain Ahmad.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 16:35, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Armen Alchian.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Armen Alchian.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 19:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bill Albright.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bill Albright.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 19:14, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peter Barnes.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Peter Barnes.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 19:23, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Edelmiro Amante.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Edelmiro Amante.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Peter Barnes.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Peter Barnes.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{Non-free fair use}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

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 "Click here to 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. Stefan2 (talk) 20:16, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent death NFC uploads - Please stop until matter is settled

Given the number of FFD hits your uploads have been getting, and the fact this started after a discussion regarding appropriateness of NFC images on the recently deceased, you should completely stop uploading NFC in the methodical way you are doing this, until the matter is settled - mass additions of NFC is never appropriate and I am going to be opening an ANI to see if it is appropriate to temporarily block/revoke uploading privileges on the matter. --MASEM (t) 20:41, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And I am going to remove all the images from the articles where it is clear that a free image may be possible to be sourced. Gaming the system is not appropriate and may be seen to be disruptive. Black Kite (talk) 20:48, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

not mass addition, using the upload wizard, one at a time. i only did about 20, only 1500 to go. if you don't want fair use images of deceased people then you need to change the policy. i will forbear for a while, but you are going to come up with better anti-fair use arguments than the ones at FFD. really "go to the archives and get the yearbook", LOL. if you don't like recently deceased, which year should i start with? each image has a google image search establishing that there are no free images. gaming the NFCC is disruptive all right, and harms wikipedia, since we know that the presence of an image increases page views from 10-70%. please indicate the venue, where this matter will be resolved. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 20:54, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are already violating policy. Regardless of whether these people are deceased, they were public figures and it is very possible, if not likely, that free images may be available for them. You will note that I have not removed at least one of the images, that of a sportsman who had been retired for a long time; that one is a discussion that can take place at FFD. The rest are of people who were clearly public figures until their death. "I can't find any free images on Google" is equally not a valid argument. Black Kite (talk) 21:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

no i am not violating policy. how likely is it if no free image has been yet produced. i find your free proselyting somewhat lacking in results. how likely is it that it will produce results in the near future.

yes it is a fine argument it goes directly to the policy point wp:NFCC No. 1 "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available"

Resolution:Licensing policy "Such EDPs must be minimal. Their use, with limited exception, should be to illustrate historically significant events, to include identifying protected works such as logos, or to complement (within narrow limits) articles about copyrighted contemporary works. An EDP may not allow material where we can reasonably expect someone to upload a freely licensed file for the same purpose, such as is the case for almost all portraits of living notable individuals."

clearly we have diametrically opposed views of "reasonable". is it reasonable to expect that you can email every deceased person's estate for a free image? or is it reasonable to make a good faith search, and team with archives and use fair use in the meantime. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 21:07, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're not making a good faith search - you're googling and then declaring it can't be done. For people who were public figures in the digital camera age or who were active at a college in the United States pre-1978, it's a darned near certainty that there exists or could exist a free photo - but you can't find/obtain it just by googling. AND THAT'S OKAY - there's no emergency to have a photo. It can wait until someone has time to do a records search at a college library. It can wait until avenues of contacting webmasters or flickr users are exhausted. In order to demonstrate the reasonableness of your belief, at a minimum you ought to contact flickr users who have uploaded photos of the person. Just last night, while illustrating a point for the WT:NFCC discussion, I emailed a person on flickr who had uploaded a Larry Fedora photo, explained our licensing needs, and asked if he would be willing to change his license. He did and now Larry Fedora has a professional-quality high-resolution free content photo. When you do bulk uploads of "fair use" images, you eliminate any chance of such a thing happening. Nobody is going to take their time to obtain an image that we already have and even if they did, any potential photographers will push back with "why should I give this photo to you if you are content to use the one you already have?" I think we ought to change policy to have a hard cutoff - pick a date in the digital camera / cell phone camera age and we don't upload any fair use photos of people who died after that date. But until such time as Wikipedia sees the wisdom of such a pro-free-content policy, at the very least we can stop these fair use binges. If you are editing an article and in the course of editing that article, you notice it lacks a photo, you attempt to obtain a free content photo, you email a couple of people who might be able to help (if applicable), and after those efforts fail, you upload a fair use one, that's fine. However, going through a category and uploading fair use photos of everyone in that category is not fine and is counter-productive to our goal of being a free content encyclopedia. --B (talk) 21:20, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you insist on having an image it is absolutely reasonable that you make every attempt to find a free image. Which does not mean "doing a Google search". That does not necessarily mean emaiing their estate (although it;s a good idea) - there will almost certainly be organisations that they were associated with (i.e. sports teams, churches, universities) and of course there are huge amounts of user generated images out there (i.e. Flickr) many of which have images with Wikipedia compatible licenses (and if they don't, asking the uploader often produces results as well). Black Kite (talk) 21:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

if your so certain, you go get the free image. i see you've done absolutely nothing to introduce free images of people to this site. don't then preach to me how easy it is. i am tied of the hypocrisy that we will only allow fair use if you jump through heroically higher and higher hoops. now it's email people. i've done my share of emailing people. how many have you done? what is the standard? will you now write down your process and get consensus at NFCC? until then pound sand. you will constantly shift your ground to require more and more effort to "allow" fair use. clearly you lost the fair use policy debate, and now you seek to enforce free image only, by twisting the language to delete every fair use image you see. your misconduct ensures that i will continue with these "fair use" binges until you stop abusing policy. no, fair use is not counter to a free encyclopedia, it is complementary. the lack of flexibility in your thinking belies the "reasonable policy". Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 21:38, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not me that wants to introduce images into the articles. This is a free encyclopedia and one of the five pillars is the use of MINIMAL free use - the page even says "Borrowing non-free media is sometimes allowed as fair use, but strive to find free alternatives first." I would strongly suggest that you join in the discussion at WT:NFC and would very strongly suggest that you don't continue to edit in a way that is clearly verging on WP:POINT. Black Kite (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i can see discussion is of limited utility. this playing subjunctive gaming of rules, "oh you could try harder to find a free image" is bullshit. i'm not making a point, i'm introducing fair use images in strict accordance with policy. fair use of deceased people is allowed. fair use is not borrowing. it's not an emergency, it's merely a couple thousand articles without image backlog. i'm going to handle it. deal with it. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 21:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion is how this website works, It's called consensus. If you decide to impose your own views of what policy actually is, especially whilst there is a discussion on the subject going on, then there is going to be a problem. Black Kite (talk) 21:58, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

what consensus, all i see is rules lawyering. where is the clear direction of what constitutes "likely" or "reasonable effort"? i don't see any ANI or discussion at NFCC. and what little i saw was do what we tell you to do, or we will block you. screw that, block me now. i see you think it "likely" that a free image will be found for Barbara Anderson (writer), Jim Anderson (ice hockey), Yuri Alexandrov (boxer), Edelmiro Amante. i take it that, if after a year has passed, and no free image is forthcoming, you would agree that the thesis was disproved, and a fair use image is allowed. what is the likely mean time for free upload? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 22:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free images in biographies of deceased people? "It's acceptable for depiction purposes alone if (and ONLY if) no free images exist." hmm, have requirements now crept up?Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 22:08, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're quoting someone's opinion from a discussion five years ago and comparing that with the Foundation's licensing policy? --B (talk) 22:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is an ongoing discussion about the issue here, as I said above. Black Kite (talk) 22:14, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i was quoting from the NFCC discussion page. hmm RFC: Clarifying policy on pictures of deceased persons: "Pictures of deceased persons, in articles about that person, provided that ever obtaining a free close substitute is not reasonably likely" now we get to argue about likely again. the requirements creep is instructive, and goes to my earlier point about increasing policy hoops. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 22:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFCCE says, "Note that it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale; those seeking to remove or delete it for non-compliance with criterion 10c are not required to show that one cannot be created—see burden of proof." In other words, it is up to you to prove that the free substitute is "not reasonably likely" (the purposely difficult task of proving a negative rather) than being up to me to prove it is reasonably likely. I have given you specific avenues in each of the images I have nominated for possibly obtaining a free image. Until those avenues are exhausted, it hasn't been demonstrated that obtaining one is unreasonable. The whole point of our fair use policy is not as a permissive policy (telling you that you can upload fair use) - it's an intentionally restrictive policy. This is a free content encyclopedia and we want to use fair use as rarely as possible For someone who died 30 years ago and was not somewhere that a public domain photo would be likely (US federal government, college pre-1978, etc), fine, have at it. But for someone who died last month and lived in a country with digital cameras all over the place, uploading a fair use photo is not what the policy was designed for. The prohibition on fair use photos of living people was never intended as a blanket permission to upload fair use photos of dead people. --B (talk) 22:55, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i provided a rationale; i provided a web search that no free image was available. how likely is it that a free image will be found? given your hectoring less likely. i see your intent is to be restrictive, but it is not written in the policy. the policy attempts to be balanced, i do not follow your avenues, since you don't own this road. if you want to change the policy, you will have to prevail at the policy discussion, which doesn't appear likely. i find your distinction between 30 years, and this year nowhere in the policy. but i take it now i have a safe harbor, against a future ANI? save your free fanaticism for the cool-aid drinkers. that is not the policy. the logic is very clear: no fair use for the living = fair use dead. that was the intention. if you don't want that, then change the policy; until then, pound sand. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 23:13, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Am I the only one who is vigorously against this stuff?" apparently. and i did not upload in response to your comments, but perhaps anticipated them, here [60]; here [61] which apparently precipitated your policy discussion. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 22:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I will take you at your word that you were unaware of the discussion, if you anticipated that bulk uploading photos of the recently deceased would be highly controversial, why do it? Why not focus your energies on obtaining free photos? Email the flickr guys before declaring failure. I used to maintain a page on Commons of formerly non-free photos I had obtained that I had to take down for privacy reasons (I was being harassed in the real world and had used my real name to contact some of the donors) but I think I had like 20 or 30 photos on it. Most of the images at Virginia Tech massacre, for example, came from me contacting people. There's an iconic photo that a kid took with his cell phone of his class mates huddled up in a corner hiding from the shooter - it was used all over the place. I looked his email address up on Tech's website, emailed him, and we got it as a GFDL photo. At the time, I argued vehemently on the other side of it - see the last entry at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 April 19 (my name was BigDT at the time). But had we simply settled with using the photo under a claim of fair use, it never would have become a free content photo. That's the whole point here. Nobody is stopping you from uploading fair use images. What we are objecting to is the bulk process where avenues for obtaining free ones have not been exhausted. --B (talk) 22:55, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, i ignore policy discussion, and ANI. much ado about nothing. more heat than light. what controversy? anything you try to do here is controversial: it's SOP. why do anything? this is not a bulk upload. this is the upload wizard one at a time. but now that you mention it, i should really write a bot for fair use uploads. i applaud your emailing efforts, but you see how it is too high a standard to gain a consensus at policy; after all one could fib, "i tried" wp:AGF. lol. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 23:13, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ramon d'Abadal i de Vinyals.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ramon d'Abadal i de Vinyals.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 01:35, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

how amusingly hypocritical. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 01:51, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yvonne Brill.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Yvonne Brill.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 02:03, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Black Kite (talk) 12:29, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

excellent. i see you like selection quotation. if you would talk policy, you need to quote it verbatim; anything else is a lie. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 12:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I used ellipses to indicate that I had removed irrelevant parts. Feel free to point out which parts of the quotes you didn't say. Black Kite (talk) 12:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

reprinting the full quotes from above:

Black Kite (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not me that wants to introduce images into the articles. This is a free encyclopedia and one of the five pillars is the use of MINIMAL free use - the page even says "Borrowing non-free media is sometimes allowed as fair use, but strive to find free alternatives first." I would strongly suggest that you join in the discussion at WT:NFC and would very strongly suggest that you don't continue to edit in a way that is clearly verging on WP:POINT.

Slowking4 ⇔ †@1₭ 21:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

i can see discussion is of limited utility. this playing subjunctive gaming of rules, "oh you could try harder to find a free image" is bullshit. i'm not making a point, i'm introducing fair use images in strict accordance with policy. fair use of deceased people is allowed. fair use is not borrowing. it's not an emergency, it's merely a couple thousand articles without image backlog. i'm going to handle it. deal with it.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive793#Mass_uploading_of_NFC_of_recently_deceased_by_Slowking4_-_possibly_a_POINTy_violation

"i can see discussion is of limited utility. this playing subjunctive gaming of rules, "oh you could try harder to find a free image" is bullshit... i'm going to handle it. deal with it."

reasonable people can make their own judgement about your tactical use of ellipses. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 16:49, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:El Deif Ahmed.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:El Deif Ahmed.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:32, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i take it you will eventually add it to the list so we can have a discussion? not there now. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 12:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I made a typo in the edit box in Twinkle: I missed a ], so the substitution of {{ffd2}} didn't work. I've added the missing ] now, so it should be possible to find the deletion discussion. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:31, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abraham Alikhanov.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Abraham Alikhanov.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 12:42, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:A. A. Allen.jpeg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:A. A. Allen.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 12:45, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for systematic abuse of the non-free content policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:55, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i'm sorry, you did not quote policy verbatim; uploading fair use images is abuse? what an interesting thesis. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 12:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your uploads make it clear that you're not making any effort beyond a google-find-upload-repeat sequence. Take File:Franz Aigner.jpg. According to {{PD-Austria}}, copyright of photos expires 50 years from publication and is PD in the US if it was PD in Austria in 1996 (so if it was published pre-1946). Are we really to believe that a guy who wrestled in Austria in the 1920s didn't have a photo published before 1946? Heck, this one might even be public domain. And regardless of whether it is, you uploaded a tiny unusable photo rather than scrolling down to the bottom of the source website and finding one of usable quality. You're not taking the time to do any of this right - you're just creating a mess. --B (talk) 13:19, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i don't really believe anything. or have to. what is the standard of care necessary before fair use upload? the policy does not say "email people to see if you can get a free license"; if it did i might, but not doing so now is not abuse. i've been very forthright; the "gaming of the system" is by those who will seek any excuse to delete fair use images, even farcical ones (without penalty). clearly you are sexing up the policy to fit the ideology of free only. if you want to put a PD austria or PD art on it do so, but this is not a policy requirement. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 14:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

here is the abuse: "The problem with settling with a fair use image is once we do it, our chances of getting a free one go to nil. Imagine the conversation: "Hi, I'm B, an editor at Wikipedia. I see your nice photo of person XYZ and would like to use it here. Would you be willing to license it to us under the terms of the GFDL or a free content Creative Commons license such as the attribution or attribution-sharealike licenses?" "It looks like you already have a photo - what's wrong with that one?" "Well, the photo we have is non-free - we want a free one." "What does that even mean? You're willing to use the photo you have now - why should I do this licensing stuff when you already have a photo?" "We believe in free content - free as in speech, not as in soda. So we try to replace photos used under a claim of fair use with ones where the copyright holder publishes the image under a free content license." "I don't understand a word you're saying to me. I'm going to stop talking now - you have a photo and sound like some kind of geek with too much time on your hands." For someone who died 30 years ago, okay, fine, we're not getting a free photo. But for someone who was alive in the age of digital cameras? Declaring failure the moment they are dead doesn't sit well with me." [62] imposing a free ideology over and above the policy is in bad faith: this does not sit well with me. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 14:36, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't "impose" anything and the only ones of your photos that I deleted were in accord with WP:CSD#F7. If you look at your uploads, you will see that I didn't even nominate all of them for deletion - only the ones that I believe we can clearly expect that there is a public domain photo out there, we have a reasonable expectation of receiving a free one, or the photo was otherwise inappropriate for use on Wikipedia. The ban on uploading photos of living people is not license to rapidly upload photos of dead people. You aren't even looking very closely at them in some cases. With File:Delia Akeley.jpg, Stefan2 and I spent no more than 20 minutes between us and found three public domain photos of her in that time. Any contribution you make to the encyclopedia should be carefully considered. If you're uploading photos you found on the internet five minutes apart, you're not carefully considering them or doing anything more than a quick google. --B (talk) 14:50, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The ban on uploading photos of living people is not license to rapidly upload photos of dead people. ": this is a false statement; the policy allowing fair use images of deceased people is permission to upload images of deceased people. what is the policy standard of rapidly? what is the policy standard of care? please quote from the policy; please do not declare what you "think", since your bad faith is established. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 15:30, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may only upload unfree photos of dead people if no free images exist. In several of the cases, it is obvious that free images exist. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

what is the policy standard of obvious? a failed google image search would indicate that it is not so obvious. honestly, going to google newspaper for a "presumed out of copyright photo" - after all it could be an AP photo subject to speedy deletion Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 16:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More abuse: "This newspaper (page 9 according to Google's numbering) tells that there was a TV broadcast titled "A. A. Allen" on "Channel 13–ABC–Asheville". Other newspapers, including newspapers from other years, mention a programme with the same name, so I would assume that this was something broadcast once a week or something. A search for "A A Allen" at http://cocatalog.loc.gov/ returns no hits, so I would assume that all programmes in this TV series are PD-US-not renewed. I would assume that you can find old TV programmes in some archive somewhere in which case you could take a screenshot from one of those TV programmes. The image clearly violates WP:NFCC#1." [63] this is evidence of bad faith: i.e. three assumptions does not equal "clearly violates". Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 18:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Delia Akeley.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Delia Akeley.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 13:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meer Akselrod.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Meer Akselrod.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:30, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Martin Aku.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Martin Aku.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:42, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ku. Alagirisami.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ku. Alagirisami.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A message for you

Saint Slowking, your Resurrection will be swift. xoxoxo SarahStierch (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

doncha know i'm Mad, Bad and Dangerous to Know, sshh, i see the speech police are out; and no Gerard Langbaine awards. actually, i'm enjoying the vacation. after Charles Mathews & me & 5 more helpers getting DNB done, i see there are 3 volumes of 1912 supplement to do. did Ouida, (speaking of mad, bad. hubba hubba) Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 18:53, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed TCO comment from userpage

guten abend?! 80.132.72.223: "removing PA, maybe the whole "shit-list" section should go", you removed a comment made by TCO not me, diff, lol. but then i see you're lacking in humor. i find the whole censoring people's user pages thing, quite a spectacle in circle-jerking. the same people who complain about AfC backlog, and NPP backlog are the ones who spend hours at ANI quibbling about just what is and isn't "allowed." i'm surprised it lasted this long, since the speech police have difficulty with nuance, but then their attention span is miniscule. i look forward to yet another drama fest about "users i will not interact with". do you approve of "do not destroy what you cannot create"? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 20:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Barbara Anderson.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Barbara Anderson.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Daphne Anderson.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:Daphne Anderson.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:08, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Giorgio Alverà.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Giorgio Alverà.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Joseph W. Alton.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Joseph W. Alton.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:17, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Tandyn Almer.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Tandyn Almer.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:37, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Werner Altegoer.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Werner Altegoer.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:43, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Yuri Alexandrov.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Yuri Alexandrov.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:46, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hey, Blackkite how is your out of policy vandalism any different than this ip editor? Click, Clack, Moo: Cows That Type why don't you just start delinking all fair use images? many other ip vandals are doing it. when you say "(rm non-free image, public figure, a free image may be available despite recent death WP:NFCC#1)" you mean "others must" since you have uploaded absolutely no images to commons, and less than 100 here. are you prepared to block over your out of consensus view: "despite recent death WP:NFCC#1"? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 12:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i'm going to contest this one, email pending. note smallbones restored. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 16:11, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shorter SIRIS links

Huge links to SIRIS have always bothered me. It now seems to be possible to come up with links like:

http://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?uri=full=3100001~!12103~!0#focus

(shortened from

http://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&profile=all&source=~!siartinventories&uri=full=3100001~!12103~!0#focus )

which are available by searching the new http://collections.si.edu/search/index.htm

All the best,

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 18:38, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) You can make it even shorter by dropping the "#focus" part at the end, it seems. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:41, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Huzzah! SarahStierch (talk) 18:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

excellent, i was manually trying the idnumber to get short form but gave up. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 19:01, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yuri Alexandrov.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Yuri Alexandrov.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Black Kite (talk) 18:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Robert Leslie

I noticed that you did some good work correcting the citations on Charles Robert Leslie. I have just finished editing the {{Cite Appletons'}} and {{Appletons}} so that they work in a similar way to {{EB1911}}. This change to the template allowed me to complete your earlier work.

I am currently working through the Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from Appleton's Cyclopedia adding various parameters to them (hence ending up on Charles Robert Leslie). This was a side track from working through Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica with an unnamed parameter and altering them to "wstitle=", but I kept coming across Appletons' and realised that it needed expansion, but not all the instances do (some need to be kept short) so I am evaluating each one and adding wstitle to the instances of the template as I go.

BTW last weekend I finally finished the work on the Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica that may need Attribution and was able to delete the category on 20 April -- PBS (talk) 00:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

excellent, now that DNB is done, we'll have to grind through EB1911 (for the French) and Appleton's (for the Yanks). i see there are over a twenty-five thousand EB1911, Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 00:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anthony John Cooke.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Anthony John Cooke.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Georges Adda.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Georges Adda.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WPA art - seems that the govmint claims they own these things!

i know you're not surprised. this is an ongoing educational mission. i.e. Can The USPS Really Restrict What You Do With Photographs Of WPA Murals?; [64]. some others here are shocked, that there is institutional inertia. but the diffusion will continue WPA Murals, Part 1; http://www.theartstory.org/org-wpa.htm. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 17:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But Bridgeman raises concerns for proposed enterprises such as Museum Digital Library Collection (MDLC) and the Art Museum Image Consortium (AMICO). Geoff Samuels, head of MDLC, asked a Harvard law school teaching fellow to produce a legal memorandum on this issue to see what options are out there for legally protecting digital images of public domain works in a post-Bridgeman world. In short he recommends a combination of: 1. introducing creative variations into the digitization process to increase the chances of the digital copies qualifying for copyright protection (but this would defeat the purpose of provided a true reproduction); 2. assembling digitized images in a collection may provide copyright protection to the collection as a whole, just as would providing value-added text and documentation, but will not protect the underlying works if they are not independently protected; 3. seeking to impose contractual restrictions upon subsequent use of the digital copies through licensing (but note a contract will not bind a third-party user who obtains the digital image); and 4. exploring the possibility of placing technological restrictions on copying. This is the most practical measure.[65]

All that seems just like wishful thinking on the part of the folks who are trying to claim ownership of the copyright. Anybody can claim ownership, but have they actually ever gotten anywhere with it, have they ever won a court case? On the other hand, there is no question that the federal government paid for the artworks, and in the government video are saying they own the artworks (rattling off the names of the various programs) and they've actually gone to court and taken possession of the artworks. I'm 100% satisfied. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 19:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

agree, they rely on the chilling effect, up to court. there is a lot of scavanging where the "lost works" don't make it to the curator. the govmnt is a poor owner, how many art saved from trash? moreover there are cases of government auctions: "In December 1943, the government auctioned off thousands of WPA-funded paintings in a warehouse in Queens. Paintings weren't sold individually, but by the pound. Reportedly, a local plumber purchased a large number of paintings in bulk for the purposes of insulating pipes with used canvases, but he discovered that when the pipes got too hot, the melting paints produced an odd smell. Herbert Benevy, the owner of a local frame shop, also purchased a large number of paintings for a total of $3 a canvas. Among those he bought were paintings by Milton Avery, Mark Rothko and Jackson Pollock".[66] wonder if you need a receipt by the pound; love to see the provenance of the Rothko. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 19:58, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

…for the stroopwafels. Yum! -Pete (talk) 21:16, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yeah they need to add the notification for mentions in blogs and twitter feeds. but you're used to sweeping those up, lol. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 19:26, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moses Anderson.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Moses Anderson.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 21:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On top of the world

Too bad i didn't have a good photo of it to upload! Sorry for the spam.

Is this Ward 6? or just over the border in ? Mass, NJ and G Streets

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 00:37, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yes ward 6; south side of Mass Ave, census tract 59; it gets problematic downtown, shifting boundry lines. [67]. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 10:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info - I should put it in the Ward 6 list soon. On the downside though the OTRS e-mail has gone in, nobody has confirmed it yet and nobody has undeleted the photos that were previously deleted. I suspect that it may go 100 days or so before anybody gets around to confirming it and perhaps some of those previously deleted pix will get lost. I just hope an unbiased OTRS volunteer will get there soon. Newly uploaded pix of the statue will stay undeleted however if the OTRS pending tag is attached, as long as the OTRS ticket is eventually confirmed. Russavia, the guy who nominated these pix for deletion for the 3rd time, and who was most vehement about not restoring them, went to the OTRS ticket and did not confirm or reject the ticket (it cannot possibly be rejected - it is as clear as could be). Rather he picked a part of a sentence completely out of context and started Wikilawyering that somebody might want to reject it. That IMHO is a foul abuse of the OTRS system. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 19:13, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yes, why would an otrs volunteer want to step up to the drama. "wikilawyering" lol, check out my "fair use" fuss. the toxic culture does make it hard to get anything done. it's not the process or the system or software, it's the culture and leadership. it's trial by combat, and intimidation by drama. you and i can take it and respond, but it deters the average editor. miss vain has done some otrs, you could tweet her, if she's not too discouraged. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 19:20, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that if I asked an OTRS volunteer to look at it, I and they might be subject to sanctions due to some previously unwritten rule. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 19:37, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

psst; wink, wink, nudge, nudge. what goes on off-wiki, stays off-wiki. turning the IRC chat tables is fair play. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 19:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks very much for the Barnstar for Jennie Maas Flexner. This is my first wiki recognition although you and others deserve most of the credit. Thanks again. Daytrivia (talk) 01:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM in April in the USA

Hello Slowking4, You have written before for the newsletter This Month in GLAM. I see the USA report is only a very short story in the edition about April 2013, do you perhaps have any idea what GLAM activities were done in the USA in April? Can you perhaps write about those? Or do you know who I can ask to write about it? Thanks! (Deadline of the April edition is 8 May.) You can start writing at the page outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/Newsroom. If you wish to be informed by e-mail next time, please write me at this page. You can reach me the best at nl-wiki talk page. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 08:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Delia Akeley.jpg

File:Delia Akeley.jpg was just deleted at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2013_April_17#File:Delia_Akeley.jpg for the reason that there are multiple public domain photos of her and we certainly have a reasonable expectation of replacing it. Rather than respect that decision, you upload another photo of her? --B (talk) 02:28, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

it's true, i have absolutely no respect for you, or the "decisions" that your wrongful perverse interpretation of policy attempts to enforce. deal with it. how many free images have you scanned? what is your new user name: bbbbbastard? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 13:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The policy, whether you like it or not, is that if there is a reasonable chance that we could obtain a free replacement, we don't use a fair use image. For anyone who was a public figure in the United States pre-1978 (especially pre-1963), it's a pretty high hurdle to say that we can't reasonably expect there to be one out there. In fact, whereas you just want to give up and not even try to obtain a free one, we have success all the time obtaining them. I have given you a few examples (Jerry Falwell, Larry Fedora, Virginia Tech massacre, Frank Beamer, Alan Keyes), where the free photos we have are because I, personally, reached out to someone and asked for them to provide us with a photo under an acceptable license. I have started volunteering with the permissions queue at OTRS and I process emails that come in from people CONSTANTLY (and there's a huge backlog right now actually) where someone said, "hey can we use this under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license" and they said, "yes". This isn't wishy thinking. Jimbo himself said, "We are powerful enough now that we can insist on this, and get it, from just about any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in a number of different ways. Using fair use in such cases discourages us from creatively looking for a way to enlarge the commons. My own view, which is at the extreme end of the spectrum I know, and therefore not (yet) formal policy in every case, is that we ought to have almost no fair use, outside of a very narrow class of images that are of unique historical importance." If you just upload something under a claim of fair use without even trying, then we're never going to get a free photo. I'm not going to argue with you over some random photo of someone who was not a public figure and if there's an image at all, it's uncertain who the original copyright holder is ... but for someone who was a public figure in the US (or in some other country where copyrights have generally expired for works created in their lifetime) ... or if the person was alive in the digital camera age and their company/ministry/organization/whatever is still promoting their interests today, we ought not to be using fair use. --B (talk) 17:59, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ralph Henry Barbour.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ralph Henry Barbour.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 02:51, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Delia Akeley.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Delia Akeley.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 02:53, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Barnes

If we absolutely must use a fair use photo for Henry Barnes (traffic engineer), how about at least using one that isn't terrible? Please see the second image at [68]. --B (talk) 17:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let's be pretty clear about this, shall we?

You pull a PA like this again, or deliberately upload another non-free image in direct defiance of a deletion discussion, and you'll be blocked. (In fact, I should really block you purely for that attack on User:B who is merely trying to uphold policy). You don't like the policies on non-free or civility? - well, that's fine, but you've got only two choices - attempt to change them, or comply with them. Deliberately ignoring them is only going to end in one way. This is a collegial website - you're simply being deliberately obtuse, unpleasant and offensive. Stop it - now. Black Kite (talk) 18:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

please do not interact with me. do not leave warnings. do not lie on my talk page. you change the policy to match your no fair use wet dream. you are the uncivil one. i always ignore trolls which you are. collegial website my ass. what have you ever done that is collegial? have you left one wikilove? have you helped one newbie to edit? i see you're playing enforcement for your new meatpuppet. go circle jerk with him, not me. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 19:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Black Kite (talk) 21:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked your account indefinitely. This is for a combination of reasons — your continued personal attacks and your continued defiance of our nonfree content criteria. Like anyone else, you're welcome to appeal this block (you still can edit your talk page), but let me remind you that using your talk page access to attack anyone is likely to mean that your talk page access will be revoked. Nyttend (talk) 23:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i am perfectly willing to work with good faith editors, and have a long history of doing so. i am not defiant of the "fair use" policy. however, that does not include the travesty that is the no fair use ideology. reasonable people might well conclude that this is a bad block. thank you for the badge of honor. threaten someone who cares about your incompetent misuse of tools. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 12:23, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In fact Slowking4 is very able to work with other editors - him, me and Final4one wrote the Robert Lombardo article together.--Laun chba ller 12:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

+1 Slowking is a dedicated Wikimedian. He also spends a lot of his time volunteering for Wikimedia DC and doing great work online and offline. Fair use does exist, and it's an important "way" around - perhaps this is time for a stronger policy change. I think it'd either be a good idea to strike fair use as being "on Wikipedia" if it's banning one user. SarahStierch (talk) 15:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm going to suggest a ban - a topic ban. I'm suggesting simply a six month topic ban from image uploads. If he could agree to that, I'd recommend unblock. What would you say to that?--Laun chba ller 19:43, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i'm enjoying the holiday. the nice thing about beating your head against the wall: it feels good when you stop. why should i put up with the sons of betacommand, when i can work at source with charles matthews? i am not alone, just go look at all the veteran editors at other projects who won't come back; look at all the expert editors, who stopped editing because they were bitten. this attitude that editors are a dime a dozen, is a limiting factor in the quality of wikipedia.

just so we're clear - this is about "interpretation" of policy, not policy itself:

we have editors nominating for deletion, because a fair use image would make it harder to email and get a free image;
we have editors nominating for deletion, because in the era of digital cameras, a free image of the recently dead must exist, look harder;
we have editors nominating for deletion, because an image in a book exists, go scan the book, (even it was printed in 1930, and the photographer is unknown) this image would be challenged at commons since the source and copyright status is unknown;
we have editors nominating for deletion, because the newspaper photo could be a commercial source although no proof of commercial source exists;
"Photo being used under a claim of fair use of a prolific American author who wrote numerous books between 1899 and his death in 1944. We certainly have a reasonable expectation that there is a public domain photo of him out there. Heck, this one might be public domain. You could try emailing the blogger where you found the image rather than just uploading it and slapping a fair use tag on it. He might be able to tell you where it is originally from. Surely, at some point, his picture was published prior to 1923, or any time in a publication whose copyright was not renewed. We have a reasonable expectation of receiving a public domain image and so using this one is impermissible." [69]
we have admins removing fair use images from articles without discussion, then letting the bot delete the new "orphan" image.

i'm curious why i should agree to anything? what is my motivation? as a counteroffer, i will agree to a 6 month topic ban, if a permanent interaction ban is agreed to, with editor B1 and B2. they will not comment on my talk; they will not nominate my uploads. since they do so little work in article space, i can stay away from them. if the policy is so clear, another admin can handle it, and it will remove even the perception that a personal agenda is being pursued here.

turning the tables: (since this is the popular sophistical trick) why would i want to come back? what can you offer me to edit here again? i've quit "aversive leadership" for money, why would i want to put up with it for free? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 01:49, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Input request

Hello Slowking4,

I am requesting input from all participants in the discussion from the recent Signpost article on sexism in Wikipedia for a proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/National teams#Proposed change: consistency in article title gendering. Thank you in advance for any contributions to the discussion. Dkreisst (talk) 21:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Henry Barnes.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Henry Barnes.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:P. K. Banerjee.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:P. K. Banerjee.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:33, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Pb-crest-2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Pb-crest-2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Hagop Baronian.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Hagop Baronian.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:09, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:USMC War Memorial Sunset Parade 2008-07-08-2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:USMC War Memorial Sunset Parade 2008-07-08-2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:38, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:USMC War Memorial Sunset Parade 2008-07-08-2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:USMC War Memorial Sunset Parade 2008-07-08-2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Navboxes on author pages

Since you are the leading registered editor in terms of edits at H. Rider Haggard in the past year, you might want to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels#Derivative_works_and_cultural_references_templates regarding including navigation boxes for adaptations of and related subjects to an authors works on the author's bio page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:09, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Smithsonian American Art Museum Barnstar

		Smithsonian American Art Museum barnstar
		Thank you for helping add, edit, and expand content about the Smithsonian American Art Museum! Please enjoy this barnstar. Bathlander (talk) 19:42, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Help, I can stop giving kittens today. Starting to feel up for a good creative meetup. And for getting more of my photos up. Yeah!!

User:Carolmooredc 20:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for You!

	The Ninja-licious[70] Barnstar
	For teaching a tiny grasshopper (Geraldshields11) some of your moves. Geraldshields11 (talk) 14:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Slowking is deserving of much praise, as a veteran editor who takes the time to share knowledge and skills. We are mortified to see them blocked, and we can only hope they have not yet contested this block because they wanted to take a wikibreak anyway. Slowking, we hope you're having a great summer. groupuscule (talk) 15:30, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

well i dunno about the praise part. i would rather have free beer than another t-shirt. don't know why you say mortified; it's situation normal. i'm shocked that there is admin bullying going on here, and veteran editors will push back inappropriately. i saw the "huggle" study where they gave a warning not to bite newbies, and some took that as an invitation to bite more.

there is clearly an ideological clique that blocks who they cannot "discourage". i'm only half way through DNB12, and lot's of loc commonist uploads to do. see you at meetups. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 00:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback Tool update

Hey Slowking4. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:57, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Counting the Barnstars and thanks a user has

Dear SlowKing4, Is there a bot that counts the barnstars and thanks a user has? If not, how and who can make one? Then, get a wiki article listing the most thanked or barnstar awared users. This would be similar to the wiki article about who has the most edits. I think it would increase the desire to be reconized. Geraldshields11 (talk) 15:08, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:La-Bionda.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:La-Bionda.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{Non-free fair use}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

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 "Click here to 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. Dman41689 (talk) 07:11, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

rangeblock

hey user:Nyttend, you might want to reconsider that permanent ip block, or you will get in a conflict with DC admins unblocking DC ip's. see also WP:RANGE. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 17:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I have no clue what you're talking about. Please give me a link or tell me more specifically you're talking about. Nyttend (talk) 18:29, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Contributing to Wikipedia' brochure rewrite: draft text is up

Hi Slowking! Thanks much for your input about the "Welcome to Wikipedia" brochure. We've got a rough draft for a new version up now, which we'd love to have your feedback on (or edits to).--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 13:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

COI

hey user:smallbones; user:sarasays - is it a conflict of interest to write your father's biography, and also refer to yourself in the third person ? i.e.:

"For his eldest son in childhood D'Arcy Thompson wrote 'Nursery Nonsense, or Rhymes without Reason' (1863-4), and 'Fun and Earnest, or Rhymes with Reason' (1865). These books, admirably illustrated by Charles H. Bennett, and now scarce, were the delight of a past generation of children."

s:Thompson, D’Arcy Wentworth (DNB12). -- Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 15:00, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer - on Wikipedia, probably yes, but we can deal with that in pretty mild, gentle ways (BTW ask me about this in person sometime for a better example).

Longer answer - there is a huge amount of disinformation about COI and advertising on Wikipedia. My take on it is that advertising and similar things are obviously not allowed on Wikipedia (e.g. per WP:NOT and just the fact that the WMF does not accept disclosed and paid for ads here - so it obviously shouldn't accept undisclosed ads where it doesn't get paid, also US law per FTC). So we need to have a simple way of preventing and policing the placement of undisclosed ads, of which there are 1,000s on Wikipedia. Current practice (though not any reasonable reading of policy and guidelines) actually encourages placing ads.

Are GLAMs caught in the crossfire? They shouldn't be. Hyping the possible problems of GLAMs with COI enforcement seems like disinformation to me. The mild COI they sometimes have can be effectively policed by WP:GLAM in a pretty gentle way. About the worst example I've seen is a museum that hyped their coffee shop in their article. A word to the wise and it was gone. No problem at all. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 16:18, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for responding. i find it delightful, that the DNB (a cast iron source) has a clear COI, that wikipedia would make a drama-fest over, and it's a shrug.

call me cynical, but i wouldn't mind the paid editing if it were just good editing. the culture is so toxic, that involved experts and companies can't be bothered to run the gauntlet of drama, but hire "experts" including snake oil salesmen.

GLAMs are getting in the crossfire, take a look at the COI troll at Wikipedia_talk:GLAM/Smithsonian_Institution#Conflict_of_interest_determination.2Fdiscussion. i overreacted, but i think justifiably; and hence, the specific exclusion of GLAMs and academics at the Wikipedia:No paid advocacy.

every editathon i go to has a long line of bitten expert editors, that we have to coach. we have no culture of judgement, or policy, for IFF between the newbie expert, and the active spam advocate. they get tarred with the same brush. the Siegenthaler Incident problem is not fixed; we are in denial. we need a culture change, for discerning the quality of the edit. all the other drama is wasting time. this is what a death spiral looks like. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 16:43, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My take is that if you write well, keep a neutral tone, cite good sources, and generally follow the norms of the encyclopedia, I don't care who your father is! In this specific example you cite, I would recommend removing the peacock language, i.e. "admirably," and "delight." I find that I bump into quite a few descendants and other relatives writing Wikipedia articles, most of them less savvy about the community and COI than the GLAM professionals. But with coaching and positive collaboration, they can become valuable contributors. I certainly wouldn't shun their contributions merely on the basis of parentage. Like subject experts, they often have valuable knowledge to offer. They just need to be guided away from COI pitfalls, like image polishing or WP:OWN. --Sarasays (talk) 17:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, COI has always been with us, but the bias was behind the curtain. it's almost primary material in a secondary source. yes, coaching newbies to write as well as D’Arcy Wentworth Thompson, is the long term answer. but, we're not doing it fast enough to stem the decline of editors. and we're too few among the many newbie biters, who set the bad reputation. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 02:56, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

David Guttenfelder

hey user:Geraldshields11 - this is the AP photographer, David Guttenfelder, [72] whose AP photos we can't fair use. but, he has a Pulitzer, so a bio article is in order. [73] Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 02:56, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Slowking4, user:Geraldshields11 - I stumbled here from "what links to" the stub on David Guttenfelder I just created. Perhaps we can expand it into a DYK? I also sent him an @ inviting him to contribute some of his pictures to Wikimedia Commons (feel free to sent him an email seconding my invitation, it's at [74], and if we are lucky, we can gain some valuable images!). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

you're smoking the dope of free culture. there is an existing photo culture that does not buy the "please give us free stuff": they're talking past each other. "if we are lucky;" not a chance. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 12:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the invite to work on the article. I will work with both of you. Geraldshields11 (talk) 13:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any comments?

Please see the last entry at User:Smallbones/Barnstars. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 00:12, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

your ears must have been burning, we talked about you at the DC meetup today (have you maintained congressional cemetery; should we re-engage and update?).

this vindictive screw sockpuppets meme is tiresome and a waste of time and effort. how dare anyone reward or encourage sockpuppets for the good work they may do sometimes. now it's remove welcomes, barnstars, and even references breaking good articles. (challenge for you: paid sockpuppet?) a better method would be positive feedback for good edits, and negative feedback for bad edits.

user:fuzheado was reiterating his comments how processes like AfC have become so hidebound, it's like Nupedia, a failed model. and how wikinews fails when it doesn't include more feature; style type news rather than breaking only. and how the veteran users would rather break wikipedia than have visual editor as default. (wikimarkup as default, would be like me requiring everyone to learn keypunch fortran)

this is what a death spiral looks like, or rather a permanent plateau (end of growth). when it stops being fun, then the entrepreneurial fun people move on, and you are left with prodigy, aol, myspace. i've moved on to smithsonian digital volunteers [75]. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 01:08, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I last contacted CC (visited) in the early spring. I was going to replace all the QRcodes (just the paper), but never got around to it. So please feel free to contact them, but I'd first figure out what you want to do there. Other than replacing the QRcodes and copyediting the article, I don't know that there's very much to do. BTW, I'd give you a barnstar, but I've already given out 1 today, and don't know if I could get a second approved by the Barnstar Committee. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 02:59, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Africa systemic bias

User:Djembayz, after our conversation at NARA, i was looking at Wikipedia:List of missing Africa topics. could we have a MLK editathon with shelf pull of A History of Africa (2002 edition) and Colonialism in Africa: 1870-1914 , and Encyclopedia Africana? the recent scholarship appears offline, but lot's of work to do. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 18:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for the photos of DC Wikimedia annual

Dear Slowking4, Please tell me what categoreies to upload phtos of the 2013 DC Wikimedia meeting to WikiCommons. Thank you in advance. Geraldshields11 (talk) 13:26, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i only just did commons:Category:2013_DC_Wikimedia_annual_meeting; as you see i only do categorising homework at meetups, lol Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 14:02, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Slowking, Thanks, what other categories do you suggest? Geraldshields11 (talk) 17:37, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

that would be the one for the event; if a person has more than one photo, then i make one for them, for example commons:Gerald Shields; then add descriptive categories (tree) to each base event object category, for example commons:Category:Wikimedia meetups in Washington, D.C. this is backfilling maintenance. we have User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao at wikipedia, but nobody at commons, so a little organization on upload is needed. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 18:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Geraldshields11 (talk) 13:12, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

baseball players

hey, user:SarahStierch you may not have seen this pitcher who pitched for 4 batters in 1925 Spencer Pumpelly (baseball), but he's a washington senator so he must be notable, lol. (i'm having a Field of Dreams moment). Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 03:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Patterson Mansion

User:Tim1965, the reason it was named Washington Club, is because that's how it's listed on the national register of historic places. that at least deserves a name mention. the statue in dupont circle was of dupont, not farragut, which is amply sourced at the Dupont Circle article. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 01:54, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Cross-wiki abuse"

i see User:Vituzzu is blocking multiple ip's & people today for "Cross-wiki abuse". what is the rationale for that? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 00:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar

		Statistics Edit-a-thon Award
		Template:Lang-en [[chandler wiland 22:51, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Template:Bots

User:SarahStierch - welcome to the user talk page control nonsense. {{bots|deny=BattyBot }} should work without having to roll out the overused lock. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 17:44, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:James Hampton The Throne of the Third Heaven of the Nations' Millennium General Assembly.tif

User:Gyrofrog PD-US no notice per SIRIS [76] see also Commons:Public_art_and_copyrights_in_the_US. why you don't counsel the uploader, rather than send warning templates, i don't know. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}⇔ †@1₭ 23:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited: Art & Feminism Edit-a-thon

Art & Feminism Edit-a-Thon - You are invited!

File:Csaky madonna.jpg

Hi Slowking4! The first ever Art and Feminism Edit-a-thon will be held on Saturday, February 1, 2014 across the United States and Canada - including Washington, D.C.! Wikipedians of all experience levels are welcome to join!

Any editors interested in the intersection of feminism and art are welcome. Experienced editors will be on hand to help new editors.
Bring a friend and a laptop! Come one, come all! Learn more here!

SarahStierch (talk) 06:09, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

deletion without notice

hey user:Werieth, i see you are nominating images for deletion without notice. [77]. how's it feel to abuse process? are you user:67.173.139.206 ? are you stealth deleting fair use images ? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 02:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

Hello, Slowking4. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nomination of Forini Epanomitis for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Forini Epanomitis 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/Forini Epanomitis until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.

Article for Deletion

Thank you for starting the article Forini Epanomitis, however the name is not spelt correctly and should be Fotini Epanomitis. I have kept all your information and created a new article under the correct name. Politis (talk) 11:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

i see you are not acquainted with the move button. this was a filling of a red link at List_of_Commonwealth_Writers_prizes, and the misspelling remains there. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 13:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yitzhak Baer.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Yitzhak Baer.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. 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. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:10, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

East Wind Over Weehawken

Began article East Wind Over Weehawken, a recently auctioned at record price work by Edward Hopper. Would like to upload image, but not well versed in how to do that. If you have time, would be appreciated. Djflem (talk) 06:15, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

hi nice work. under the tools menu on the left hand side is "upload image", or Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. fill in the blanks for "this is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use". an example of a similar article is Hotel Lobby. see the rationale and license at File:Hotel Lobby by Edward Hopper.JPG; one fair use image per article, as you will see in the history of that article. you are treading in the footsteps of user:SarahStierch. keep up the good work, however, if you continue to upload "too many" fair use of contemporary artworks, you may be kneecapped by the wp:NFCC mafia. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 13:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

nice upload, however they prefer size less than 30kb. should have warned you about photos in lists. separate rationale for each article. don't put it back if they delete, unless you want to get blocked like me. you can use template:external media to link to images off wiki. links to wikipaintings [78] or institutional page [79]; [80] might be better. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 16:02, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Margaret Pardee

wrongful speedy, you could BLP prod, or AfD. go template someone who gives a damn about your incompetence. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 05:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spider bourgeois.JPG

user:Mark Arsten, i see you deleted this image without discussion or notice. the replacement image has a copyright problem. when it is deleted from commons, you will of course replace the fair use one? or if not, would you then be proven a deletionist? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 16:40, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted under the WP:F5 criteria, since all fair use images must be used in articles. If it meets the fair use criteria for a certain article and you would like to add it, let me know and I'll undelete it. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

in case you weren't paying attention, you have a continuing problem where ip's and others are removing fair use images from infoboxes, and then the bot comes along and deletes the image. for example [81]. but now we have admins abusing the speedy delete process, for the policy explicitly says: "Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criterion/criteria the page meets, and should notify the page creator and any major contributors." so much for notification. why don't you add it back to the infobox Spider (Bourgeois) where it was. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 16:57, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First Division Monument‎

user:174.77.185.71, i see you added a cut and paste from the NPS website [82] versus [83]. you might want to rewrite, or credit properly as PD-USGov. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 22:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar

		Click, Clack, Moo: Cows That Type Award
		user:Werieth Thank you for your participation in the Click, Clack, Moo: Cows That Type deletionathon, 11 February 2014! by your summary prod of File:Crazy Horse Memorial 2010-2.jpg without notice to the uploader, you display your contempt for policy. congratulations! chapeau! Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 03:38, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Patrick Abercrombie.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Patrick Abercrombie.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item 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 creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media 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 the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MASEM (t) 17:52, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Mir Jafar Baghirov.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Mir Jafar Baghirov.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 17:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the same pic (more or less) File:Mir Jafar Baghirov, head of special services of Azerbaijan.jpg, is now in place in the article Mir Jafar Baghirov. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 18:39, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

hilarious. what is the point of replacing a fair use image with a "free" license of the same image with "unknown author" who has been dead 70 years? and above, replacing a crisp photo, with a blurry screenshot of a false UK Govt claim, and then another crisp image with same copyright problem as first. File:Patrick Abercrombie, 1945.png you're just deleting away good image curation for worse, because of ideological issues. maybe now, we can restore this image Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sir Henry Rider Haggard.png given the "relaxation" of copyright enforcement over at commons. just say, "don't want mass deletions". pure incompetence. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 12:50, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

well now user:Werieth here is a test: will you replace the fair use image since the commons image was deleted, or are you a deletionist? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 20:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiConference USA 2014

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2014_WikiConference_USA_(Group_L)_25.JPG is the better group conference photo Geraldshields11 (talk) 18:38, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

32D Deep Throat request

Can you check out Talk:Deep_Throat_(Watergate)#Photo_of_garage_meeting_spot 1401 Wilson Blvd., Rosslyn VA, spot 32D. to be torn down Jan. 2017. Thanks Smallbones_(smalltalk) 12:55, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arlington Board Approves Plan To Demolish 'Deep Throat' Garage [84] Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 18:27, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving this page

This page is huge. would you mind if I put an auto-archive bot onto it so that only the most recent sections were kept? -- PBS (talk) 12:23, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Appealing the year old block

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive793#Mass uploading of NFC of recently deceased by Slowking4 - possibly a POINTy violation (17 April 2013)
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive796#User:Slowking4 — "Blocked indefinitely; I made the NFCC issue the primary thing, but I made sure to reference NPA also. Nyttend (talk) 23:28, 8 May 2013 (UTC)"[reply]
See above #Let's be pretty clear about this, shall we? (and the deleted comments from that section)

User:Slowking4 I interacted with you over the update of articles that used the the template {{EB1911}} where I think you did some very good work. Your block has been in place for over a year and it is time that it was reviewed, and if you are willing to answer yes to the three questions below then please appeal the block

Are you willing to abide by the Non-free content criteria (NFCC) policy?
It would be best if you agreed not to upload any images onto Wikipidia (instead upload them onto wikicommmons if the images meet the criteria there) for at least a year from the time you are unblocked, so that there can be no doubt that you are abiding by that policy. Are you be willing to do this?
As to the No personal attacks ((NPA) are you willing to try to abide by the policy?

-- PBS (talk) 12:21, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for the kind offer, however, consider this conversation [85], about this edit [86].

as far as i'm concerned i was abiding by NFCC: apparently we disagree whether uploading 20 fair use images of deceased people per day, after a google image search is within policy or not.

i'm not really interested in asking for an unblock: i can have no confidence in a fair process given the standard of discussion linked above;

i'm training newbies to upload fair use images at editathons; i've uploaded 10000 images to commons; i've transcribed 10000 pages at source; i've transcribed field notes at smithsonian [87]; i have a wikimania talk to work on. when you have some competent admins, then i might think about it. (that is not a personal attack, that is a professional assessment) Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 02:49, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shame, because you are a very high quality editor. (In my opinion, images should be at Commons anyway and if you are doing a good job there, then the reason for blocking is no longer applicable.)--Laun chba ller 10:37, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Capitol Hill event - August 18

Hey! I wanted to let you know that the event invite is set up, in case you want to share it with anyone. The announcement is here. I'm looking forward to this! Thanks. HistoricMN44 (talk) 13:34, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:HistoricMN44, thanks, will you be there? i should praise your efforts to the skies.

Yes, I'm one of the panelists. Why? HistoricMN44 (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ok, good, the wp:LEGDATA project should interest them. lots happening, i think i can handle all the wikicultural history. there is also Wikipedia:Dialogue on edits by U.S. Congressional staff page, for dialogue. Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 21:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Transparency Time: Wikipedia-Editing for Congress

Congressman "explicitly authorized" him to promote hate speech at Wikipedia, says House staffer recently returned following temporary ban. Any thoughts? JohnValeron (talk) 23:56, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Galvez right.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Galvez right.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:LogoProvinceBenSlimane2.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LogoProvinceBenSlimane2.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:14, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

why don't you put the fair use image back in the article, since it's been deleted from commons yet again.[88] & this is a continuing stealth deletion problem, i.e.

a question for the admins: what is the difference between user:69.116.168.168 [89]; user:black Kite [90]; and user:71.106.169.196 [91] + User:Werieth [92] -- what did Black Kite know, and when did he know it? Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 00:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Facts not Opinions

I thought you might like this. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 14:47, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Irene Higginbotham.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Irene Higginbotham.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:21, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you user:smallbones. as you see there is a concerted effort by a mobile user to delete fair use images. i wonder who that might be? can that deletionist be swamped with new fair use ? ( i may clear my schedule for Ocean City, but next time make it in the summertime) Slowking4^{Farmbrough's revenge}♡ †@1₭ 18:41, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[FOOTNOTEChisholm1911-1] Chisholm 1911.

[FOOTNOTEChisholm1911269-2] Chisholm 1911, p. 269.

[1]

[2]