User talk:Cullen328

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
I don't live on Cullen Ct, but I like the street sign

Welcome to my talk page I use the name Cullen328 on Wikipedia, but you can call me "Jim" because that's my real first name. If you want to start a new conversation, please click "New section" at the top of this page. I keep the old comments from July and August of 2009 that follow the "Contents" here, because these friendly words of greeting made me feel welcome when I first started editing Wikipedia.

The importance of a friendly greeting

Hello and welcome to my talk page. If you want to start a new conversation, please click "New section" at the top of this page. I keep the comments that follow from July and August of 2009 readily visible, because these friendly words of greeting made me feel welcome here on Wikipedia when I first started editing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:38, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Please offer your thoughts

I would appreciate comments and suggestions on any contributions I make. I am learning.Cullen328 (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice work on Jules Eichorn. He's been needing an article for a while.   Will Beback  talk  06:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
If I may suggest, now that you've posted the Eichorn article the draft below might be deleted. It's your talk page to do with as you like, but it's a bit hard to edit around.
As for formatting and pictures, a good way to learn is to look around at other articles to see what you think looks best. It can be helpful to break up long blocks of text into subsections. Perhaps it'd be possible to split the biography into two or three eras. Other than that, the formatting is usually kept fairly plain. As for photos, it's easy to upload them: the trick is in finding photos with appropriate licensing. If you have any personal photos then those'd be fine. There are might be pictures of the peaks he did first ascents on in the Wikicommons. File:Cathedral Peak.png is a so-so pic of Eichorn Pinnacle.
As before, feel free to ask if you have any questions. There are several editors here who are mountaineers or just admirers of the Sierra, so you're in good company.   Will Beback  talk  21:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
PS: Many editors create "sandbox" pages for drafting articles. For example, User talk:Cullen328/Sandbox.   Will Beback  talk  00:17, 1 August 2009

Your climber biographies

Hey Jim, just wanted to say welcome and thanks for your contributions to the Sierra Nevada climbing history articles. You're filling a niche that's been missing here, I look forward to working with you. --Justin (talk) 11:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll second that. Nice work on Allen Steck and welcome to Wikipedia. I don't know who you are planning to write up next but if your taking requests I think Peter Croft (climber) could really use a page. If you ever have any questions please ask. Thanks again for your great additions.--OMCV (talk) 02:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Justin and OMCV. I am beginning work on Tom Frost and Glen Dawson. Comments on Norman Clyde would be welcomed. I will defintely read up on Peter Croft, OMCV. I am still "learning the ropes" in Wikipedia, to use a climbing analogy, and have all sorts of things in mind. My biggest challenge right now is getting permission to use images. My next biggest challenge is hiking to the top of Mt. Whitney with my wife in ten days - she's never been above 12,000 feet except for the train ride up Pikes Peak. As she's 56 and developing arthritis in her toes, it will be an accomplishment if she (and I) complete the Class 1 feat. Jim Heaphy (talk) 02:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Debra and I made it to the summit of Mt. Whitney at 2:20 PM on Friday, September 11. Jim Heaphy (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

2009 Archive

2010 Archive

2011 Archive

2012 Archive (first six months)

Automatic Archive 1Automatic Archive 2Automatic Archive 3





Cullen, I'm going to get straight to the point. I have had off-wiki talks with other editors trying to find candidates suitable for an RfA, and without exception they have all said "Why isn't Cullen328 an admin"? Seriously, you've got nothing to lose, I can cobble together a good nomination (which will include diplomacy, teahouse work, AfD stats, article work - especially Canadian drug charges and trial of Jimi Hendrix which I did the GA review for and article rescue) and I've already got people taking bets on it being included in WP:RFX200. What say you? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:57, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words, Ritchie333. I sent you an email on this matter. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:28, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Allow me to echo Ritchie333's words here - I think you would be an ideal admin candidate, and I would love to see you run. I mean, why not? You would be a shoo-in, and the extra buttons are bound to be useful for things from time to time, even if you don't end up using them often. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 12:49, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate your encouragement and that of other experienced editors, Mr. Stradivarius. Thank you very much. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
I just put Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cullen328 on my watchlist so that I won't miss out on supporting such a proposal. Binksternet (talk) 01:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Binsternet. Although I do not rule out taking that step, there are "real world" factors having nothing to do with Wikipedia that I have to manage successfully first. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Alfried Dettke[edit]

Hi Jim Many thanks for the positive open minded comments, I regret that my embarrassing lack of IT skills is showing through plainly here, when I registered with a view to loading a whole series of articles on little known but highly successful air aces (data collated in European archives over the last 3 decades) I had thought that there might be a "template" for a biog article and as you can see I struggled. As I mix mainly with aviation enthusiasts I couldn't understand the apparent indifference to a 44-45 victory fighter ace. I've got a load of data, I have photos (of which I own the copyright) but I struggle in getting it loaded in a format which people here find acceptable. I have read through the various guidelines for newbies but I haven't found a solution obvious to my limited IT abilities. I'm pleased to share what I have, much of it is unavailable even in books yet. Any help appreciated. ThanksResearcher1944 (talk) 19:03, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Researcher1944. IT skills are secondary and can be learned easily. Wiki markup is not rocket science. What is most important for you to realize is that this is a project to build an an encyclopedia based on summarizing what has already been published in reliable sources. When you say these aces are "little known", then that raises red flags among experienced editors. Wikipedia is not the proper venue for publishing original research or publicizing "little known" people. A biography must be based on what published reliable sources have said about the person, and it must be significant coverage, not just an entry on a list. One option is for you to submit your research to a military history journal. Once published there, it could be used here on Wikipedia to establish notability. In all honesty, I am surprised at the seeming lack of sources for an ace with 40+ kills. Seemingly, it is military aviation historians that have shown "apparent indifference" to this person until now, not Wikipedia editors. You see, experienced Wikipedia editors are single minded. When evaluating notability, all we care about is the quality of the sources discussing the topic. Nothing else. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:56, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jim I decided to can that idea. I think I'll try to create some based on some of the many existing "stubbs" and also add material to existing records which have very thin existing resources and references for statements made. Researcher1944 (talk) 13:50, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Public Storage[edit]

Forgot to tell you (you might have gotten my ping) that I provided a draft on the Talk page. It's a quite a bit of stuff to pile on at once and there's naturally no rush if you want me to circle back with smaller bits or go about it some other way, or just wait a few weeks for you to get around to it, or even just find someone else with more of an interest. I think you'll find the proposed products section sufficiently negative, but we may disagree about the significance of their corporate structure and their notability as an investment vehicle. I felt the sources made a pretty big deal about it. CorporateM (Talk) 08:35, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I prefer not to get heavily involved with this article at this time, CorporateM. Although I understand your point, I think our opinions about what this particular article should look like are just too far apart at this time. I made a brief comment on Drmies' talk page also. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:52, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jeb Bush[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jeb Bush. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

I respectfully decline to comment. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:56, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Teahouse conversation continued - regarding my new page[edit]

Dear Jim, Thanks for getting back to me! As per your advice, I am going to copy the article that I began creating in the general Sandbox to my personal sanbox under my used. I am a bit confused though, because I see that the previous page that I created (for Walking Men Worldwide) is mentioned there, and I wouldn't want to overwrite anything by creating a new article.. this is what appears in my "box" - #REDIRECT Walking Men Worldwide

  • This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name. For more information follow the category link.

Based on your experience, should I just start the new page by deleting this comment?

Hello Alonhadas. Now that you plan to use your sandbox for another purpose, that redirect accomplishes nothing. Simply erase the redirect code and start fresh. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:26, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi again Jim. I was successful in creating the page, thank you. However I am now struggling with a new issue - both my pages (Walking Men Worldwide and Maya Barkai) have been nominated to a speedy removal because of text copyright issues. I have made adjustments, hoping that the text will be different from the referenced articles that are causing the issue, however the notice was not removed and I am not sure what to do. Since I am new at this, I wonder if you would mind having a look and advising me on better ways for the text? Thanks again for your time and patience! Alonhadas (talk) 22:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello Alonhadas. There is only one solution. You must immediately remove all copyrighted material from both articles. Except for brief cited quotations, all the material must be original writing which summarizes but does not directly copy the source material. This is an important legal obligation and is not negotiable. Advise the editor who tagged the articles of your intention to remove copied material. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi again Jim, thanks for the advice. I understand the restriction, and have made major adjustments in my text. I am wondering however, how to approach sections like the Exhibitions list. The details are obviously informative, and include names of institutions, cities/countries and dates. How could I word it in an original way? Thanks again and best regards, Alonhadas (talk) 03:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello again, Alonhadas. A simple list of factual information is not protected by copyright law. On the other hand, an artist's website will often list every exhibition under the sun. Copying that here is excessive and not encyclopedic. My recommendation is to list only those exhibitions which have received coverage in reliable, independent sources, and cite those sources. That accomplishes two things. It shortens the list, and limits it to those exhibitions most important to the artist's career. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:01, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
As an example, Alonhadas, please take a look at a WP:Good article I wrote, Cedric Wright. I only mentioned three exhibitions showing his work. The goal is not to create a curriculum vitae, but rather a well-rounded biography of a human being. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:09, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for all the help so far, Jim! Alonhadas (talk) 03:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Alonhadas. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:51, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Park Yeon-mi[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Park Yeon-mi. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

I do not think that I can contribute productively to that conversation at this time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:00, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

The deletion of my page[edit]

Hello Jim, I am not understanding that you "ripped up" and deleted my post. I have had many press mentions, and do some serious volunteering projects with my work. I don't understand the big difference between some of the people listed on wiki, and my company with unique designs. There is a lot to purse fads and history, which I discuss on my site.

Is it required first that my company be mentioned in Time magazine? Do I need to site all the sources of mention for you - will this help?

I would also like to get the writing back.

Becky or RMChAFFEE

RMChaffee (talk) 07:28, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello RMChaffee. I did not delete your page but simply offered my opinion of it since you asked for comments at the Teahouse. An administrator (not me) deleted it, only an administrator can restore the content, and I am not an administrator. Please read further about how notability is defined on Wikipedia. "Press mentions" are not sufficient. Instead we need significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Material on your website about purse fads and history does not establish notability of your brand. Your website is not independent since you obviously control it. If your company is mentioned briefly in Time magazine, that is not enough. If, however, Time magazine and several other similar publications with professional editing staffs and good reputations for accuracy and fact checking wrote full length articles about your company, then that would be strong evidence of notability.
Please read and understand Your first article and Conflict of interest.
We have nearly 5 million articles on Wikipedia, many of which should be deleted, and poor quality new articles pour in constantly. We delete hundreds of such articles every day. Pointing out that other poorly referenced articles exist is not a logical argument for creating a new poorly referenced article. Instead, we either improve or delete those other articles. Cullen328 [[User

talk:Cullen328|Let's discuss it]] 07:52, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

So can you help me out in some way Mr. Cullen? RMChaffee (talk) 21:29, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

I replied at some length on your talk page, RMChaffee. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:41, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Problems with my Sandbox & Getting an article in draft form read by an editor[edit]

I have lost what was in my sandbox 2 times in one day (6 hours work in total) because the instructions regarding "Save" led me to believe it was going to be uploaded as a new article which I was not ready for yet. Did I not understand what is meant by "Save"? Is it just going to save as a Draft without uploading it as a new article?

Also, when I am happy with the draft how do I get the Table of Contents set up? Article Wizard is of no help with this.

Finally, how do I get an editor to look at my final draft so I make corrections before publishing it as a new article?


Steven Rich in Panama (talk) 18:02, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hello Steven, once you click "save" at User:Steven Rich in Panama/sandbox or at Draft:Panama Real Estate it will not become a live article. You can keep editing and saving your draft there until you think it is ready to go. When you feel ready for review, please put the character string {{AFC submission}} on top of your draft text and save again. This will alert the reviewers.
The table of content is created automatically once you have added at least three subsections with headings in the style of == First section ==, == Second section == etc. where you can put any text between the equals signs. De728631 (talk)

Is this bad?[edit]

I'm not sure if I've done something wrong; user disputes my edit on my user talk here and I reverted them citing WP:DENY because they were making no sense and just sounded like they wanted to cause trouble. Their only contribution before that was the addition of unsourced, non-neutral and factually incorrect content. Should I have assumed good faith and replied or something? I responded but then changed my mind and reverted because they were making no sense and appeared to be acting in bad faith. They also insulted me by calling me 'Talk rubbish', which is not even a proper insult. Thanks, Rubbish computer 00:46, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Rubbish computer. This is a brand new editor. I would have used an initial edit summary and left a welcoming talk page message for them. Though their edit was unreferenced and pushed a POV, it was probably in good faith and not "rubbish", if you will forgive the expression. If I was in your shoes, I would not have reverted the comment on my talk page. I would have replied to their comment, referring to the appropriate policies and guidelines. If the conversation seemed to be heading out of control, I would have collapsed it and requested on their talk page for them to stay away from yours.
DENY applies to genuine trolls and I am unconvinced by the evidence that this person is truly a troll. They may be but it takes more of an ongoing pattern or something more explicit to draw that conclusion. I do not think you did anything terribly wrong, but since you asked for my advice, I am offering my own opinion about how things might have gone better. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:15, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
As for "talk rubbish", that could be an insult, or it could be a new user struggling with Wikipedia jargon and nicknames. Do your best to assume good faith, until there is strong evidence to the contrary. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:18, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
@Cullen328: Fair enough. I was worried I was going to get blocked or something. Rubbish computer 01:43, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
If editors got blocked for incidents like this, Rubbish computer, there would soon be no one left, except the very last blocking administrator. But we can all strive to be more welcoming. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:47, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

re : Image Copyright[edit]

Hi Cullen328, and thanks for your swift response on teahouse, In response to your question I did not take the dog picture and yes I did indeed get them from a dog rescue site but I am not able to find the copyrights to these pictures. am I not looking in the correct place??? where do I find them??? Thanks again--Dominoooo's (talk) 06:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominoooo's (talkcontribs)

Hello Dominoooo's. I replied on your talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:08, 5 August 2015 (UTC)


Im not trying to gain privledges to show off or gain control or anything, I just wanted to be confirmed to gain more features sooner because i got hooked quickly on wikipedia but also because i wanted to request rollback rights and the right to be a pending changes reviewer because my favorite thing to do is stop vandalism and those tools would make it less of a pain for me and more of a learning proccess whrre i can enjoy it more and feel like i xan contribute more. I got confirmed and then because i requested two privldges to help improve wikipedia, some administrator thinks i cant handle myself and revokes my confirmation without wsrning. Its very frustrsting and i was proud that the user on wikipedia with the second most edits was the one to personally confirm me and then an administrator who thinks they know everything comes along and takes that away from me and makes wikipedia less enjoyable for me to help out on. TheEditorOfAllThingsWikipedia (talk) 07:10, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Theeditorofallthingswikipedia. I have given you my good faith advice, which you are free to accept or ignore as you see fit. The one thing that I will say is that many experienced editors disapprove of "hat collecting" behavior, so please consider that carefully. As a side note, I did not receive any advanced rights for many months after I started editing. I did just fine without them. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:16, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

copyright discussion.[edit]

Hi Cullen328, okay I'm not sure if I as the downloader of the pictures have the authority but if able to I will attempt to delete them straight away. if I'm not able to I will get back to you and ask you to delete on my behalf if that's okay? --Dominoooo's (talk) 07:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Learn to Live Article[edit]

Hi Jim,

Just reaching out to see if you had any specific thoughts about my article related to "Learn to Live, Inc." I welcome your thoughts on this. Thanks for your help by the way - I'm a bit new here and it is taking a little getting used to!

Esemque (talk) 00:13, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I commented on this draft at the Teahouse. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:51, 9 August 2015 (UTC)


You might want to see Talk:Bob_Muglia#Lack_of_criticism. It's regarding another GA or CorporateM's reviewed by LavaBaron. SmartSE (talk) 12:32, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I see that the content has been added to the article so I think I will stay away, so as not to ruffle any feathers. Thanks for the tip, though, Smartse. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:14, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nikola Tesla[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Nikola Tesla. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen328/ re. Roberta Grossman[edit]

Dear Cullen328:

Thank you for your encouraging words on my draft

I have been working on this for several months. With my new additions of verifiable, high quality sources (NY Times, Washington Post, Wall St. Journal) can it be resubmitted again?

I appreciate your help and counsel.


--Ahurvitz2 (talk) 15:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

You can resubmit your draft any time you want, Ahurvitz2. The major newspaper sources you mention seem to have mentioned Grossman only in passing. We are looking for sources that devote significant coverage to the topic (Grossman in this case) rather than passing mentions. We are looking for coverage that provides a variety of biographical information about Grossman. So, please continue adding such sources to the draft article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:02, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Adding cover images[edit]

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your response. I fully agree with your rationale - but how do I "just do it"? I've gone to one of the image pages and tried to update the summary and licensing info (adapted from another album page from the same band), and was greeted with a rapid deletion message. The code I used was as follows:


Media data and Non-free use rationale
Description Far Skies Deep Time cover
Author or
copyright owner
Big Big Train
Source (WP:NFCC#4)
Use in article (WP:NFCC#7) Far Skies Deep Time
Purpose of use in article (WP:NFCC#8) to serve as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the work in question.
Not replaceable with
free media because
Minimal use (WP:NFCC#3) Official album cover artwork from the artist's website
Respect for
commercial opportunities
Fair useFair use of copyrighted material in the context of Far Skies Deep Time//


Shall I wait for the image to be deleted then reupload with the appropriate info?

Many thanks, Craig

Far better to do it now, properly, Faroutsider. That way, the article is not adversely affected. The other deletion discussion can take its course. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Slight problem[edit]

I thanked User:Icy monster gun for giving me a kitten when this seemed to be in response to me answering their question at the Teahouse. I did so be fire realising this was a vandalism-only account with the user at best messing about when they gave me a kitten. I got rid of the kitten, which was virtual rather than real. Should I add a general note to the user's talk page explaining my action, or just leave it?

On a side note I already thought it was suspicious that they asked the same question they'd asked three days ago. It's good to see that action was taken swiftly. :-) --Rubbish computer 21:44, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I do not see any problem, Rubbish computer. You responded in good faith to what seemed like a friendly gesture. You have nothing to worry about. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
@Cullen328: Fair enough. Thanks. --Rubbish computer 02:18, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

A 3RR report needs more info[edit]

Hello Cullen328. You have commented at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Vantastic2014 reported by User:Citobun (Result: ) which suggests you must know something about the article. A bunch of accounts have now been blocked by a checkuser per WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Vantastic2014 but Vantastic himself is not among them. If you read the SPI there is a sense that Vantastic2014 is not linked technically to the others. We might still use behavior to make a connection. If you have time to read the SPI, can you check if you see any convincing behavioral argument that implicates Vantastic2014? Otherwise, the SPI and the edit-warring case might both close with no action against Vantastic2014. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:30, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello EdJohnston. I have not edited the article or even looked at it all that closely. Shortly before making that comment, I was sharing some of the dramatic photos and videos of the explosions with my wife, which are on many websites. I ran across a news article discussing Chinese government censorship of social media posts and then looked briefly at the Wikipedia article and noted with satisfaction that the matter was discussed here. I then read another online article about the matter, returned to Wikipedia for a more in-depth reading of our article, and noticed that the censorship content had disappeared in that two or three minute period. Before I could revert, another editor did. Checking the history, I saw that Vantastic2014 had removed the content, and that they had made several similar edits hours earlier. I also saw the edit warring notice on their talk page. That motivated me to make the comment at the edit warring investigation.
I needed to get to bed and have been mostly sleeping and working since then but I do notice that the edit that caught my attention was Vantastic2014's last one to date. So, I have no information or insights into this editor's possible sockpuppetry. I will keep an eye on both the article and the editor in question, and will give you a "heads-up" if I see anything out of line. Thanks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:25, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I'll try to close the AN3 report within 12 hours if there is no new information. It's not easy to apply the edit warring rules when a new article is getting so many edits in a short time. EdJohnston (talk) 02:17, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
I understand completely, EdJohnston. Thank you for all the good work you do here. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:22, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
Thank you for your general civility and willingness to both help extensively and continuously, along with the complete honesty of your advice. Rubbish computer 17:19, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate that, Rubbish computer. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:22, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Re: Is Copyright Owner's Permission Sufficient?[edit]

Thank you for your response. And yes, it is a draft (in my Sandbox). I think I understand what you wrote, although I'll need to read #10 of the non-free content policy again. If I actually do understand correctly, I also do not need to include "Photograph courtesy of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Archives." Is that correct? JRicker,PhD (talk) 17:34, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello JRicker,PhD. Here is the general rule: If you are writing a biography of a notable person who is dead, and there is no freely-licensed photo of the person available, then you can use a low resolution non-free photo without asking for permission, only in that one encyclopedia article (not a draft). You should say where the photo came from, (that archive in this case), and you need to explain your rationale for using the photo, referring to WP:NFCI #10. Please feel free to ask for clarification, or for help on other matters. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:47, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, that clarifies the issue for me. Thank you! JRicker,PhD (talk) 17:49, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Artist's images on Wikipedia that don't cede copyright and don't require OTRS involvement.[edit]

Gloriosky! I knew that such a thing must exist!

Anyway, yes, please, let's discuss how I can include illustrative works of art for the Alberto Gómez Gómez article and pieces like it.

I certainly don't want Alberto's rights stomped upon, nor anyone else's for that matter. I have many such projects in mind and would like to get one right (more or less) from the beginning. Thank you for you kind invitation :-D Rmark1030 (talk) 19:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Rmark1030. I suggest that you try to have the images deleted from Commons. When you upload them here on Wikipedia, use Template:Non-free 2D art. Read that thoroughly, including how to write a rationale, and emulate the examples of rationales. Good luck. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:38, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you, thank you, thank you! I will do exactly as you've recommended. Did I mention thank you? Rmark1030 (talk) 19:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Perhaps I am being dense. I get the purpose and use of this template. I'm certain how to make an appropriate rationale. I'm equally certain that this case is squarely within the purview of the template. I just don't get the syntax. How would this look when completed? Would this be included in the text of the markup? If so, where – does it appear before the image, after the image, what? Is there an example of an article which deploys it? This last might be the most useful. I could copy, paste and edit as necessary. All of this, too, lacks the vital information: How to upload the image in the first place. Dunno. Oh, dear. Anyway. Working on it. Thanks again. Rmark1030 (talk) 20:55, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Add referenced content to the article about the specific painting, including critical commentary, Rmark1030, When you upload an image file on Wikipedia, you need to fill out a form with all the information about the image. In this case, that would include a descriptive file name that should correspond to the name of the painting, You also want to add the artist name and other information about the painting. If it is on public display, where it is located. That creates an information page about the image that is always linked to the image. The image needs to be on your computer's hard drive (or equivalent), and should be low resolution, no more than 400 pixels wide.
The toolbar on the left side of the screen has an "Upload file" option. Click that and select the Upload Wizard. Choose the file from your hard drive. Give it the descriptive file name discussed above. Add information about the painting, artist and so on to the "Brief description" field, Click the bubble that says "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use". Add the article name. Click the "None-free use rationale" that says "This image is the object of discussion in an article." Select "2 dimensional artwork (painting, drawing etc.)" and answer all other questions in the form to the best of your ability. Then click "upload". When the image has been uploaded successfully, you can then use it in that specific article.Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:38, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)@Rmark1030: I think Cullen's suggestion is a good one and something worth considering, especially as a way to protect the artist's interests; However, there are some drawbacks to licensing an image as non-free that you also should consider. Because such images are considered by Wikipedia to be protected by copyright, each use of the image needs to satisfy all ten of the criteria listed at WP:NFCCP. Out of the 10, the most difficult to satisfy for most images tends to be WP:NFCC#8 because the "contextual significance" typically requires that the image be subject of sourced critical commentary within the article itself. In other words, a non-free image cannot simply be used for decorative reasons (like in a gallery of images). For example, the way File:Daydreamer-W.jpg is being used in Alberto Gómez Gómez#Controversy would probably satisfy NFCC#8 because the image itself is the subject of critical commnetary which seems to be supported by a reliable source. In this case, it could be argued that seeing the image actually improves the reader's understanding of the "controversy" to such a degree that removing the image would be detrimental to that understanding. On the other hand, the way File:Sounds-W.jpg is being used in Alberto Gómez Gómez#Example of work would most likely not be considered acceptable per WP:NFG and NFCC#8 because the usage is primarily decorative and the image itself is not the subject of any sourced critical commentary. Finally, it's important to try and remember that any discussion of an image needs to be supported by a reliable source in the same way any information about Mr. Gomez needs ideally should be supported by a reliable source so that it is not considered "original research". - Marchjuly (talk) 14:42, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your input, Marchjuly. Please note the comment I made above, where I wrote, "Add referenced content to the article about the specific painting, including critical commentary". I am well aware that random galleries of "fair use" images are not permitted. A fair use rationale for non-free use of a copyrighted image is not "licensing", since any good faith user can do that, but only the copyright user can "license" the image. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry about that Cullen. For some reason, I thought I referenced your "critical commentary" comment in my post, but I must have removed that part before clicking "Save page". It was late and I revised the post a few times so sorry if it seemed like I was correcting what you wrote. In addition, the "gallery" comment was really intended for Rmark1030 since they are still fairly new to Wikipedia and might not have been aware of it. Finally, in hindsight, as you point out, the way I used "licensing" was indeed inappropriate in this context. My bad. - Marchjuly (talk) 06:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
No problem, Marchjuly. It is clear that you took a careful look at the article and how each image was used, and how they related to the text. I appreciate your comments, and let's face it, this is a very complicated project and image usage is especially tricky. I still have much to learn. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:51, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Snježana Kordić[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Snježana Kordić. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Lacking Balkans expertise, I think that I will refrain. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:52, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to contribute[edit]

Dear Jim, I'm Irene, I'm italian, and I've started just few days ago walking in this beautiful wiki-world. I started 'cause I saw on an italian voice Andrea Liberovici that there were some mistakes. I knew Andrea from 20 years, I follow his work (he is composer and director) and I tried to put neutral information and references. Doing this, all the notes from wikipedia are gone. I saw there is a voice in english too. I don't know who did this, but I'd like to contribute if I can in the same way. I started to correct some mistakes and to insert some reference, but most of them are in italian. Do you think it could work too? I really appreciate f you can help me doing this work in the best way. Thank you in advance Irene--Irenenovello (talk) 10:06, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Irenenovello. Sorry for being slow to respond but I have been very busy. Italian language references are just fine, although English language sources are preferred. I am not sure what you mean by "all the notes from wikipedia are gone" because it looks to me like most of your additions to the article are still there. One editor did correct typographical errors. The article needs a more neutral tone, but that is a matter of editing. Please be more specific about your concerns. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:49, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Jim. The notes I mean in the italian pages are the issues, that are still there in the english pages. I'll try in these next days to improve the reference in the english one. Do you think the tone of the bio is still not neutral? Thank you so much. Irene --Irenenovello (talk) 08:40, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Urinary tract Infection article discussion[edit]

okay, no problem, I'll add it back with a reference to a peer reviewed journal article documenting that the stuff is safe and efficacious. Clair Brown, Richard Katz and Michael McCulloch. ’Yeast Mannan Oligosaccharide Dietary Supplement In the Treatment of Chronically Acute Urinary Tract Infections: A Case Series’ UroTodayInternational Journal, Published June 27, 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard8081 (talkcontribs) 12:07, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by, Richard8081, and I wish you well. I believe that the conversation taking place on your own talk page will answer your questions. I am a generalist editor. The editors commenting there have expertise in medical topics. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:32, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


Sunandclouds.svg Sunshine!
Hello Cullen328! Bhootrina (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Bhootrina (talk) 14:36, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Please clarify "peril"[edit]

Thank you for your note about German citations[edit]

Hi Cullen328, thanks for your helpful note about German citations in an English article. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and want to make sure I create an article that has proper links. You mentioned interviews, or perhaps Q&As, wouldn't be ideal. But would profiles in major German newspapers work? Thanks again!! Harper70 (talk) 15:53, 20 August 2015 (UTC)Harper70

Hello Harper70. Independent reporting in national and regional newspapers helps establish notability. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:31, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rubin Carter[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rubin Carter. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Sandbox query[edit]

I accidentally saved an edit on my mobile to my sandbox which was not especially constructive and potentially disruptive, and I can't believe my stupidity at having accidentally saved it. I reverted it. Is this an issue? Thanks, --Rubbish computer 02:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I just really don't want to be blocked for disruptive editing, as I want to continue to help here. --Rubbish computer 02:53, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I do not think you have much to worry about since you reverted promptly, Rubbish computer, and editors are given a high degree of latitude with their sandboxes. On the other hand, fooling around like this does not improve the encyclopedia so I urge caution. See Wikipedia:About the Sandbox for more information. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I was just wondering. Apologies for this silliness. --Rubbish computer 03:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I was worried they might have blocked me thinking my account had been compromised. --Rubbish computer 03:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


Thank you for your kind words in response to my message to the Signpost. You can't mean me, the one found guilty of battleground behaviour by the arbitration committee. (They didn't tell me why, btw.) Today it's two years that my friend Andy was almost banned because he helped me by uncollapsing an infobox (very short version, more here, the question is at the bottom). I should have read this essay before dealing with arbitration, - bottom line: avoid if you can. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

I think that you are a friendly and productive editor, Gerda Arendt, and I hold you in high regard. I know nothing about the arbitration case, but if it had anything to do with infoboxes, then these are my thoughts: I think that every editor who is a strong advocate of infoboxes should be topic banned from anything having to do with infoboxes. I also think that any editor who is a strong opponent of infoboxes should be topic banned from anything having to do with infoboxes. I feel the same way about people who debate endlessly about whether it out to be "the Beatles" or "The Beatles", the spelling of yogurt vs. yoghurt, the Israel/Palestine issue, Gamergate, Balkan nationalism, and so on and on and on. Topic ban all dedicated advocates, and let neutral encyclopedists make the decisions. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
The case was (only) called infoboxes, it was requested for reverts of added infoboxes, - that was new, not what the arbs had heard all these years, so they tried to pacify the situation the old way: by banning one editor. It happened on 28 August, and I remember how I sick I was. (The edit cited was not even adding an infobox, it only looked like it. Repeating: it was only called infoboxes. The edit was to help me, - look at Peter Planyavsky, on the talk the perfect example of endless pettiness, matching The Beatles. Imagine a Wikipedia where I had simply added an infobox to an article I created, and nobody interferred, imagine!) I said they would still have to deal with me, so they had to restrict me, very easy, I have not edit warred once, did you know? There is no justice, and how would you fix that by topic bans? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:34, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Topic bans in cases like these remove editors who care much more about "the issue" than about improving the encyclopedia. There is only one Wikipedia encyclopedia, but there are millions of "issues", both grand and small. Wikipedia is not a venue for "seeking justice", and all such efforts damage the encyclopedia. Nothing can be fixed only by topic bans. It is only a first step. But when disruptive POV pushers are topic banned, it creates a space for neutral editors to improve the encyclopedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Agree. - Please understand that I am not here to seek justice, - you remember the spiral of justice with its 1510 message. But when injustice got so bad that an editor was threatened to be banned because he uncollapsed an infobox for me, I had to do something, and I take the bad reputation with pride, see my user page ;) - He wasn't banned after all, but honoured by our founder, and hardly ever deals with the lowlands of infoboxes anymore, working for accessibility on a higher level. A reverted infobox means reduced accessibility, - why would anybody want that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Infoboxes are optional. Period. Full stop. If consensus develops that infoboxes are preferred or deprecated, then we can implement that consensus. Until then, they are optional. Accordingly, since the matter has long been contentious, and the infobox warriors on both sides have made countless edits rehashing the same extreme foolishness countless times, then every single infobox warrior on both sides of the issue should be topic banned. forever. Period. Problem solved. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I normally stop at two comments, but please listen. You are right. They are optional. I agree. I don't put them in articles of others without asking. But if I choose the option to have one, as I did on Peter Planyavsky, why all this reverting and discussing? That is the question? That was the question raised several times (I counted 59, including some that were never more than a suggestion on the talk) which led to the case (only) called infoboxes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bill Cosby[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bill Cosby. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

I have done so. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)