Jump to content

User talk:Grincitygal

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


Wiki Scholars class participant[edit]

I am part of a course taught by Wiki Education that trains scholars in how to edit Wikipedia. Learn more at wikiedu.org. All of my contributions are my own and I take responsibility for them.

Course: Smithsonian American Women's History Initiative Wiki Scholars

I work for Drake Community Library, the public library for Grinnell, Iowa. I oversee digital archive projects and my area of focus is the history of the area.

Grinnell Historical Museum moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Grinnell Historical Museum, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources.

In addition, there is a WP:UPE or WP:COI issue.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, and have addressed the UPE/COI issue, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Do not move the article into mainspace yourself. Onel5969 TT me 14:47, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Grincitygal, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! Nathan2055talk - contribs 17:54, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Grinnell Historical Museum moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Grinnell Historical Museum, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 07:50, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I ought not to have re-draftified this. It is, however, not ready for main space. I will take steps to move it back to be an article, however it requires significant improvement in order to be an article instead of an advert.
There is a suggestion here of paid editing. I will place a warning below this message whcih is a formal question which you must answer. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 07:54, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021[edit]

Information icon

Hello Grincitygal. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Grinnell Historical Museum, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Grincitygal. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Grincitygal|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 07:55, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have added that information to my user page. Given that I took a class on creating content from Wiki Education I am surprised they didn't address this issue. Grincitygal (talk) 13:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Grincitygal Thank you for doing this. There are things you may not do, one of which is to have moved the draft to mainspace. They ought to have covered that FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 15:23, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Grinnell Historical Museum for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grinnell Historical Museum 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/Grinnell Historical Museum until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 08:12, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Timtrent, I was encouraged to create an article for the Grinnell Historical Museum as their collections are essential in providing resources related to the notable women of this area, including the recently created articles for Cornelia Clarke and Edith Renfrow Smith. The reference links provided in the article are from local resources (the Chamber of Commerce, the newspaper of the area college). I have added a citation to the collection in the Drake Community Library archives, none of which is available online at this time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornelia_Clarke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edith_Renfrow_Smith Grincitygal (talk) 14:02, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's challenging to edit here where everyone is expected to know all the rules from day zero. I think as the creating editor you shook participate in the deletion discussion and ask for iyt to be returned to draft in order that you are entitled to make the necessary improvements. Th only edits you may make to it ib main space are simple corrections of fact. I believe that also includes the addition of referencing.
You would be wise to add {{Connected contributor (paid}} with relevant parameters filled out to the articles talk page. Transparency is always appreciated.
You may cite references that are not online. All we require is sufficient information in the citation for an interested reader to be able to verify the facts you assert. There is a whole family of citation templates available to you.
Notability in a Wikipedia sense is hard and passing WP:NCORP is one of the hardest to pass FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 15:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Timtrent, It is a steep learning curve. I didn't have any issues like this on the biographies I wrote during the class. If I am understanding your concerns correctly, the issues here are because this article is about an organization and the article seems too much like an advertisement for them. I have added additional information to the article, noting two books published by the museum on local history, one of which included research into the family of Edith Renfrow Smith. I also noted the significant research they did in the discovery of the works of photographer Cornelia Clarke. Both of these women now have articles in Wikipedia that reference the work done by the museum. I have added the Connected/paid contributor info per your suggestion to the museum talk page. Grincitygal (talk) 15:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The problems started when you moved it to be an article, not once, but twice. Thsi was inadvisable with the then state of the draft. The second time I moved it back to draft. This I am not entitled to do because repeating the move is seen as move warring. MY only recourse was either to ignore it or to send it for a deletion discussion.
I hope the education you received explained that Wikipedia is a brutal place. I say that with care. Editors defend Wikipedia with a brutality and tenacity that can astonish.
Now, your problem can be addressed by reading this essay. Look at the process element. That is the process that wins every time in new article creation.
You also need to furnish Wikipedia Commons with permission from the copyright owner to use the picture according to Commons licencing. Commons is a wholly separate place with very stringent rules
If you didn't have these issues with the bios you wrote during class you must have dine a good job, or the tutor did not do a great job. or some middle ground FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:32, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Grincitygal! Your additions to Billy Robinson (aviator) have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 23:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate and respect the need to ensure items are within copyright. In that Robinson died in 1916, I thought that any photographs of him would be in the public domain since they are more than 70 years old. Can you please explain why this is not the case? Grincitygal (talk) 18:10, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the description, which was copied from https://www.iowaheritage.org/items/show/69390?collection=108. Note that the website also states that copying the image itself requires their written permission. — Diannaa (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah.... I understand. We are actually the entity that added them to Iowa Heritage, although we have moved to a new building since that was done so the old name shows on their record shows Grinnell Public Library and the name for the new library is Drake Community Library, Grinnell, Iowa. So we are the entity that would give permission to use it. Grincitygal (talk) 14:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are a couple of problems in that case. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.
The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 19:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not writing an article about my own organization. We are a public library and hold the historical material about this individual in our archives. I am not promoting my organization, only sharing the archival materials we have on this subject. I state in my user information that I work for the public library and do archival work. Grincitygal (talk) 14:10, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Grincitygal&oldid=1165335033"