User talk:Chrischmoo

Notability of Jane Harvey

A tag has been placed on Jane Harvey, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Corvus cornix 22:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Air Policeman Eddie (1963).jpg

Hello, there is no image at Image:Air Policeman Eddie (1963).jpg, but you've created the page with the summary "Edited by chrischmoo on behalf of Eddie Woods copyright holder of this photograph deleating no copyright warning notice & adding 'self' tag as there is no tag for 'copyright holder who is not creator" and a PD-self tag. Is this an error? Thanks. --Strangerer (Talk) 03:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC) Hello. Sorry I am new at this and having problems with uploading a couple of pictures. I think the pictures have been deleted from Wiki Commons because they are not in the public domain. To answer your question: I did write the summary, but I think it is correctly describing an error (ie what I was trying to do won't work in the way I was trying to do it). I have just posted a request for help and more info regarding the problems I am having to Polarlys (talk page) in the hope he/she might help (as they left a useful comment). If you know anything that could solve this please let me know. Thanks.[reply]

"The problem is one photo was taken in 1963 of the subject by someone unknown. The subject owns the only known copy but was not the creator. The second photo was taken of the subject under his direction using his camara and film and he owns the original negative. I have statements (which I can supply) from the subject covering the first photo, and from the creator of the second photo (who is not the owner), and the owner, releasing them for use on wikipedia."
Hi Chrischmoo, I'm glad you've stayed to figure out the situation instead of getting frustrated and giving up. The first image depends on who retains the copyright to the image. I think Polarlys is mistaken in that aspect, since a person or company could own the rights to an image if someone else created it (depending on the circumstances). Does the subject in the first photo own the rights to the image? Has (s)he released it under a free license or into the public domain, or would you like to claim "fair use" for the image?
The issues about the second image seem clearer to me. As Polarlys explained, free "for use on Wikipedia only" is not sufficient for this project. If the owner has reserved the rights to the image but says it's okay for Wikipedia to use the image, it is still copyrighted, and you would need to claim a fair use rationale for it and upload it on en.wikipedia.org. If the owner has released it under a free license, then it is fine to upload it to the Commons, and you could use that license tag along with mentioning the source of the image.
To prove that the owner has released the image, you could have them send an email as outlined at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Is that clearer? I'm not sure if I explained it well enough. Reply on my talk page if you need more clarification! :) --Strangerer (Talk) 08:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Harvey

It was deleted as a result of the following discussion, [1] in which it appears that you agreed to the deletion. If your opinion has changed, the thing to do is to first expand the article substantially on a subpage of your user page, and then ask at Deletion Review for it to be reinstated as improved. If that is what you want to do, tell me, and I will start the page for you with the latest version. However, to do this, I think you should try to see if there are any reviews of her performances or books, and add them. Without this at least, there will be some difficulty. The strongest will be reviews of the performances, as the criterion here is easier. You will also need to expand the information of the publications which she edits. Gas she made any recordings? Has she composed any original arrangements?

I have glanced at some of the other pages you have been working on, and the same thing holds--they will be much stronger with reviews of performances or reviews of recordings. Any print on online source will do, as long as they are regular publications, not a blog. DGG 21:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page was deleted by W.marsh (talk · contribs) based on the discussion at the AfD. If you think she meets the notability requirements of WP:MUSIC or WP:BIO you should contact that user and discuss with him. Eluchil404 21:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you DGG: I think it would be useful to do as you say, so yes, please start the page for me, and I will add some more information. Thanks for your help. Chrischmoo 22:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Judy Wood

I've replied to your latest message on my talk page. My reply to your previous message had been less relevant than it might have been because I had been looking at the history of the article Judy Wood, whereas you were referring to the deletion record for Judy wood, which was a very different article. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:14, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]