User talk:CoryHReynolds

License tagging for File:Bowes Ed Better Stronger TheKitchen March31 1979 courtesy Kitchen Getty.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Bowes Ed Better Stronger TheKitchen March31 1979 courtesy Kitchen Getty.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) 13:30, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am new at tagging. I tried to tag the image with this license: {{Cc-by-1.0}}

Can you tell me if I did it correctly? CoryHReynolds (talk) 14:27, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Nadja-tesich-bleecker-theater.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Nadja-tesich-bleecker-theater.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) 23:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Nadja-tesich-bleecker-theater.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Nadja-tesich-bleecker-theater.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 00:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadja Tesich (December 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Spinster300 was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nadja Tesich and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Spinster300 (talk) 17:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CoryHReynolds! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Spinster300 (talk) 17:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadja Tesich has been accepted

Nadja Tesich, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Xegma(talk) 16:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xegma,

I added quite a few new primary and secondary citations to the Nadja Tesich Wikipedia page. I did not want to delete the box at the top because I wasn't sure if I'd be penalized -- even though it looks like I am authorized to do it.

I don't understand the comment that it looks like it "contains content that is written like an advertisement." All of the text was written originally. I was trying to be as clear and accurate as possible.

Could you possibly advise? I appreciate your help very much!

Sincerely yours CoryHReynolds (talk) 20:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bowes Ed Better Stronger TheKitchen March31 1979 courtesy Kitchen Getty.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bowes Ed Better Stronger TheKitchen March31 1979 courtesy Kitchen Getty.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. 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. Nthep (talk) 11:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright and licensing 101

Hi. Sorry, I only just saw you comment on the deletion discussion.

As you might have seen from the other comments at the deletion discussion, with US copyright, copyright status depends mostly on how long since publication of the work and whether the formalities of the copyright act then in force were observed. I'm afraid it's not as simple as plonking a license on the upload and hoping for the best. You need to start by identifying who the copyright holder is - this is normally the person or body who created the work e.g. for photos it's the photographer (most of the time) and not the subject. So even though one of the actors gave you the poster, that isn't permission for you to reproduce the poster. As George Ho has worked out, the poster is now out of copyright and with the correct copyright tag attached will stay.

If works are not out of copyright (this is normally because of it's age or because copyright has been waived or forfeited or it was ineligible for copyright. Once it hits this status, this is often called public domain), then the copyright holder can give permission for their works to be used with or without conditions. Creative Commons licenses are a specific type of license that aims to allow re-use with minimal fuss and basically they say "you can reuse this work without having to ask for any more permission each time you use it as long as you follow the conditions of the license".

Only the copyright holder can grant a license, this applies even if the copyright holder is unknown. It's a common issue that people think works with an unknown author are public domain. They might be, in certain circumstances e.g. age, but anything recent(ish) is still going to be in copyright.

So having identified the copyright holder, the next step is to establish if the work is now out of copyright. c:Commons:Hirtle_chart helps you work this out for US works. If works are not of pre-1929 publication then this might involve more than a quick look because of checking whether the formalities were abided by regarding what a copyright claim looks like and whether the copyright was ever registered.

If the work is out of copyright, then great. If not, then is it something that was ineligible for copyright e.g. works prepared by employees of the US government are ineligible for copyright, or so simple that they are not "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression".

If, after all this, you find a work is still in copyright, then you either give up at this point, or consider fair use or try and contact the copyright holder to see if they will grant a license that Wikipedia finds acceptable.

Once you start looking at works that are non-US then you start to find out what the differences are. Most of the rest of the world do not use age of the work since publication, but work on how long since the author died (life +70 years is the most common), they also may have different rules about what is ineligible for copyright.

We do have a place where you can ask questions - WP:Media copyright questions - where you can normally get an answer for most queries. Nthep (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thank you! i think i changed to the appropriate commons copyright tag, according to the chart that you linked. you were so helpful! i hope i did it right. please let me know if i did not! i used this one. {{PD-US-1978-89}} CoryHReynolds (talk) 13:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]