User talk:OSMOND PHILLIPS

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk | contribs) at 19:09, 30 November 2015 (→‎Doubtful photograph). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Your recent edits

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015

Information icon Hello, I'm Theroadislong. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Mattie Blaylock, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 21:22, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Jesse James, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 21:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

Information icon Hello, I'm Btphelps. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Bat Masterson, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You've uploaded a number of images but have failed to establish the provenance or copyright of the images. Inadequate sources don't prove these images are valid nor that the image is pre-1923. Unfortunately the so-called Phillips Collection has not been vetted by authoritative third-party experts. Wikipedia cannot lend credence to images of dubious origins. btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 18:15, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright discussion

To help you get your images uploaded successfully, I've initiated a discussion. Please participate! — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 23:31, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Information icon Hello, OSMOND PHILLIPS. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

  • avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
  • instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
  • avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
  • exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies.

You have confirmed your conflict of interest in this discussion Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2015/October#Images with unknown copyright and origin and therefore should not be introducing anymore photos from the Phillips Collection into anymore articles. In addition according to the photos you have already uploaded OTRS has not received any verification regarding this images. If you have not sent them anything please do so immediately. Please do not add anymore photos and instead follow the conflict of interest guidelines outlined above. Thank you. Stabila711 (talk) 07:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
[reply]

Stabila711, Thank you for helping me understand the Wiki guidelines. I will be contacting OTRS as soon I understand the process better. I also now understand that I need to request any changes using "propose changes". I will be following the procedure. Thank you again for letting me know. New user at Wiki, OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk) 02:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Granting permission to use photos

Osmond, to grant permission to use your photos on Wikipedia, you need to complete something called OTRS. This is explained here. In a nutshell, you need to grant permission using the guidelines here. If you don't complete this process, all of the photos will be deleted. Also, please note, that when you upload photos to WP, you are granting anyone permission to use them in any way they see fit. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 03:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Getting photos added

Hi Osmond, to work around the possible COI, when you upload photos, you can make a list of them on your User page, and let me know. When I have time, I can add them to relevant articles. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 02:24, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BtPhelps, I appreciate your help. I will let you know when I add photos. The ones I have left are of very high profile people. I am waiting for final facial analysis before adding the photos. Just like the Jesse James and Wyatt Earp photo. people will dispute it and will be very angry if you say you have a photo of their Old West hero. I will be able to use the same forensics that are accepted in our court of law as evidence backing the images.OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk) 01:56, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtful photograph

Osmond, Happy Thanksgiving! I don't have access to the professionals who have supposedly reviewed all of the photos you are posting and pronounced them as genuine. But I have a serious issue with accepting that this image you uploaded (#1 below) is actually of Wyatt Earp. Of the many images of him that are well-established and have some kind of known provenance, the only faint resemblance between this new image and the other known images of him at various ages is his ears. They eyebrows, the hairline, the hair style, and hair part are all different. Furthermore, given the clothing style, I'd place this photo circa 1910, making Earp about 60 years old. The person in this image doesn't appear to be 60 years old, and when compared to known images of Earp at ages prior to and after the estimated date of your image, they don't compare very well:

I added three photos of Wyatt Earp comparisons as partial evidence that the Wyatt photos from the Phillips collection are actually of Wyatt.

This collection will also be able to prove that the well known photo of Wyatt at age 21 circa 1870 is actually circa 1875. We have a photo of Wyatt at 21 pictured with his wife Urilla. We will also be able to prove without a doubt that the photo of Josephine Earp taken at Fly's studio is not Josephine. We know who it is. The photo has passed as Josephine for decades and is posted on Wiki. Another photo is of Crawley Dake posted on Wiki with a Dake photography stamp that is not him. This collection will add to Old West history. Now allowing it to be recognized while further research is being done on its provenance is a disservice to our Old West history. Thank you for your consideration. OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk) 06:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I will be able to provide evidence from Photography and Facial Forensic professionals that the photo is of Wyatt Earp before the end of the year. It is circa 1885. I would prefer that you just take the photo down for now instead of deleting it from Wiki because it is hard to use the image again. I do not understand the process to re-instate photos.OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk) 02:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One of our articles on Wyatt Earp and a photograph has just been published on Historynet.com. A shorter version of the article has already been printed and will be out again in the February issue of Wild West magazine. The editor has already sent us copies. Search Wyatt Earp in Ellsworth to find it. The extended article with more photographs from the Phillips Collection pertaining to the event in Ellsworth in 1873 can be found at historyandmystery.net. Our facial analysis on the photo showed some consistencies in authenticated photos of Wyatt. We could not get higher results due to his ear not being clear enough. The editor and his panel of Earp historians could see the strong possibility of it being him and accepted the article.OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk) 02:23, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important to address the provenance of this issue because once the image is accepted and used on Wikipedia, it will acquire some legitimacy. There are other images of Earp not found on Wikipedia that also do not appear to match the image you recently uploaded. I have a serious issue with accepting at face value the unqualified determination that this image is of Wyatt Earp. The same could be same for many of the other images you've uploaded, though I am considerably less familiar with those western personas.

I'm not sure what the resolution is, but I guess in this instance I'd like to know who the "expert" is that came to the conclusion that image is of Wyatt Earp, what is that expert's background, and how that person came to that conclusion. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 04:31, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Osmond. I noticed on the Jesse James talk page another editor disputed the authenticity of two images uploaded by you which were subsequently deleted. Some of the images you've uploaded appear to be a good match for the identity of the individual named. But others are quite a stretch to accept as legitimate.
After further consideration, I believe you need to disclose your real identity and who you work for. You've stated on my talk page that "I AM THE AGENT AND PROMOTER OF THIS COLLECTION." No one can be assured that any potential conflict of interest related to the many images you've uploaded is resolved unless you disclose your personal information and employment related to these images. It seems obvious that if you're hired to promote the images, someone stands to reap some kind of potential financial benefit from these images that have been identified by an unknown individual. For example, a legitimate image of Jesse James can be worth a very large sum of money.

An email has been sent to you regarding who I am and my connection to the Phillips Collection. I will also attach the contract that states this when you respond. Thanks, OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk) 02:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is unfortunately a delicate situation and I regret that it's necessary to ask this of you. I'd like to trust everyone and every company, but that's just not possible. You've also stated in a discussion about the copyright origin of the images that "I also have a signed contract from the owners that allows me to promote the collection. I can submit a copy of the contract." If you're willing to submit the contract which would identify the company and your name, then it should not be a stretch to disclose your real identity and who you're employed by here on your talk page. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 07:41, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to the Jesse James pages. We will continue the discussion after I have facial analysis results.OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk) 02:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OSMOND, the images you uploaded "not for public viewing" are already public just because you uploaded them. If you don't want that, go back to the images NOW and edit them and add this template and fill in the blanks.

{{Delete |reason= |subpage=[already filled in] |day=30 |month=November |year=2015 }}

Otherwise anybody and anyone can not only view them but modify them to their heart's content. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 18:49, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


BtPhelps, I don't mind if the photos are seen. I added the "not for public viewing" meaning these images shouldn't be used on Wiki pages. They are only to help in the discussion of the Wyatt Earp photo. I don't know why anyone would add them to a wiki public page anyway. I have changed the caption. The comparison photos were added as partial evidence. Another example of my inexperience. Thank you for your alert and concern. OSMOND PHILLIPS (talk) 19:08, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]