User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2020/July

English version of my wiki posts

Hi Marchjuly.

I just read your reply now. Thank you for your help!

Best,

Alexandre — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexandreDevil (talk • contribs) 09:54, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Advice for newcomers

Hello,
You are receiving this message because you are invited to take part at Wikipedia:Advice for newcomers where you can provide advice that will help our newcomers in the future. It is not a discussion forum, just a place where you say what advice would be helpful to our future editors. I would like to get at least 100 editors to take part in this so please feel free to spread the word to other editors as well. I look forward to seeing what you say to newcomers. Interstellarity (talk) 13:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

The Call of the Wild: Dog of the Yukon - edit

I have a question regarding a review that was added to this article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Call_of_the_Wild:_Dog_of_the_Yukon

The Call of the Wild: Dog of the Yukon

The TVGUIDE.Com review for this title was published on May 10th, 2020. The film was released in 1997. The reviewer did not even get the release date of the film correct (they said 1996, but it was actually 1997). The reviewer took a line from the original New York Post review and poked fun at the film and the NYP review - more than 23 years later. I don't see why a review of a film - made 23 years after its original release - should be included in this article. Film tastes and styles change over the years, as do audience tastes and styles. It has been my experience that Wikipedia includes pertinent reviews of a film made just prior to - or shortly after - the film's original release, not more than 23 years later. This seems irregular, unfair to the original filmmakers and mean-spirited. I tried to remove the additional reference, which was reversed by you - user Marchjuly. I'd sincerely like to understand why.— Preceding unsigned comment added by RandySWT1 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi RandySWT1. The best place for you to discuss your concerns about the TV Guide review would be on the article's talk page; however, just because the review appears (this is not so clear as I will try and explain below) to have been years after the film was released doesn't mean it shouldn't be mentioned. Lots of films are re-assessed as time passes, in some case many years after the original release; so, maybe there's a way to incorporate or clarify the TV Guide review it was actually published long after the film was released. The actual publication date of the review is not so clear though. The review can actually also be found on this February 2018 archived version of the same website, but it may even go back further since many websites often host content that from years past. The May 10, 2020 date is what's called the "access-date", which is why it says "retrieved May 10, 2020" in the citation. The access-date is the date the person who added the review accessed the website or the date the source was last verified, but it's not necessarily the date of original publication of the source. The person who added that content is Nick Moyes and the edit which added it can be seen here. I'm sure Nick would most likely be happy to clarify this on the article's talk page. Anyway, this kind of thing is better off being discussed on the article's talk page because that will make it easier for others to participate and that will make it easier to archive any such discussion for future reference.

You seem to have posted the same thing twice on my user talk page by mistake. It looks like you forgot to sign your first post and wasn't sure how to add your signature after the fact; so, you just posted the same thing again. Your signature should go at the end of your post, not in the section heading or at the beginning of your post. If you're not sure how to sign a post, please look at WP:TILDE since that's the easiest way to do so. Here on my user talk page, forgetting to sign your post or incorrectly signing your post is not such a big deal; on article talk pages (particularly when multiple people might be posting), however, it can help avoid confusion if you sign your posts. All you need to do is click "Show preview" to check whether you've signed your post; if you forgot, just go the end of you post and add ~~~~. Click "Show preview" once again to check your signature and then click "Publish changes" if everything looks OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:54, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, sorry... I've now replied on the Teahouse page. Kindly take a peek. I don't agree with Nick's assessment. But it appears I'm outnumbered.RandySWT1 (talk) 17:46, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

From Teahouse

@Marchjuly: - I followed you here from your post / comment on WP:TEAHOUSE. Wanted to let you know that I saw the way you want back into the disappointed user's posts, and connected the user back with the person who was providing feedback / review assistance.

Empathy can seem in short supply in many places around here, and I want to let you know that you displayed tremendous amount in the forum!

Thanks for being a role model for the community! Good luck. Kaisertalk (talk) 04:24, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

I just tried to help that particular user out. Sometimes you give a good answer, sometimes not so good. Hopefully, they will figure out a way to sort things out and decide to keep editing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:26, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Sorry for the disturbance, but how would i make a template? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.67.69.251 (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't know very much about creating templates, but it seems you also asked the same question at the Wikipedia Teahouse and got some answers there. If you still need more help, perhaps try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:28, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Everett McCorvey

Hello...I saw that you made some changes to the page I'm trying to create on Everett McCorvey. It is, as I'm sure you can tell, my first effort at a Wiki page although I've done some editing and gone through some of the tutorials. I didn't understand what you meant about copying the work and am not sure now that I am looking at the version that you created rather than my last version. Any help appreciate! Jacalyn Carfagno (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jacalyn Carfagno. For reference, it would've been OK for you to respond to the post I left on your user talk page by simply posting the above right below mine. It's OK for you to post here, but keeping everything in one place can help avoid splitting discussions and thus make things easier to follow, particular for others who might want to comment as well. So, I will post my reply on your user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:54, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Moved to User talk:Jacalyn Carfagno § Draft talk:Everett McCorvey

 – Marchjuly (talk) 23:54, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Image

Hey there. I have noticed that you have removed an image from Timelapse of the Future. Being someone new who is still trying to learn, I respect your decision to do so. Do you have any suggestions to how the picture can be placed back? In what ways can it be recognized as fair use? I am new to these stuff, so this can be a way for me to learn something. A reply would be highly appreciated. GeraldWL 14:36, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Album cover art is generally considered OK when its being used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of a stand-alone article about the album itself per item 1 of WP:NFCI, WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFC#cite_note-3, but it's much harder to justify such a non-free use in other article unless there is sourced critical commentary about the actual cover art itself (not just simply mentioning the album by name). So, this particular cover is most likely fine for The End of Everything (EP), but I don't see how it can be justified in the article about the film per item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI. If you disagree, you should add a non-free use rationale for that particular use to the file's page before re-adding the file to the article, but be aware that adding a rationale doesn't mean a non-free use is automatically compliant, and the use can still be challenged if someone disagrees with the rationale. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:51, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sōta Fujii

Hello! Your submission of Sōta Fujii at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Esculenta (talk) 17:24, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. I'll respond on the DYK page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:02, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

About File:Cuyahoga County Council logo.svg

bsd. Hi. I was wondering why doesn't File:Cuyahoga County Council logo.svg comply with NFCC? Thank you. --Ben Stone 13:17, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

I’m not sure why I removed that file, but I’ve gone ahead and re-added it. The edit summary I left makes me think that my brain simply froze and I possibly mixed that file up with another some other file. Thanks for catching this mistake. — Marchjuly (talk) 15:19, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

No worries! Happens to me too! Thank you. --Ben Stone 21:39, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

I think I sort’ve figured out why this might’ve happened. The file was being improperly used in Cleveland and a couple of other articles; so, when I removed it from those articles, I must’ve unintentionally mixed this particular use in with those. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

A blast from the past...

An article popped up on my watchlist, which has lead me to remember a "situation" that occurred @ March 2018 involving Laramie1960. She was a passionate person who was editing Juliette Benzoni and related articles. She ran afoul of our *rules*, etc, and took it very personally.

You, Curdle and I spent some time working with this worthwhile, absolutely good faith editor, who had great difficulty understanding WP copyright rules, encyclopedic tone, etc., etc.

I recently reread our various exchanges on her talk, and was struck, once again, by your kindness, helpfulness and your supportive, yet factual comments. Back in 2018, I was already aware that you are a busy, well-respected and very competent editor. This was not the first time that I had seen you expend a great deal of time, reaching out to assist a "lowly newbie". I was pleased and "impressed" that a editor of your stature would choose (once again) to get involved. Years later, your pattern continues, and I notice you are still giving kind and helpful advice, by answering at the Teahouse.

So, best wishes to you, and many thanks. Sincerely, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback and the kind words. I don't really remember the specifics of that discussion; sometimes I get a bit lucky and post something that others find helpful. It that was the case here, I'm glad things worked out OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

John J Flood

My name is John J Flood and my name is on a Wikipedia page

It has been brought to my attention that the entry might be deleted

Be advised that I have a national reputation as a police union labor relations leader and expert on organized crime in the United States.

Considered as one of the founders of police union labor movement in the United States of America

Any person - student of college or university police administration curriculum would be missing police unionization history should such miss a search upon the name

This posting of my history was not placed upon Wikipedia by I - but I have been cognizant of its posting by students who advised finding the information on this website

I am not computer astute and no longer employ a staff that would have such expertise - so unable to be aware of problems as to this police information and the name being on Wikipedia

Should there be any questions I can be contacted directly by phone at the below number

Thanking you for your attention to this matter and awaiting your reply, I remain

John J Flood — Preceding unsigned comment added by JJFCCPA (talk • contribs) 00:30, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@JJFCCPA:. The article John J. Flood is currently being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John J. Flood and you are welcome to make your case for keeping the article by posting there. Before you do so, however, I suggest you take the time to read through Wikipedia:Notability (people), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Contributing to AfD discussions, Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions and perhaps also Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing for reference. Please also understand that the subject's of Wikipedia article have no final editorial control over such articles as explained in Wikipedia:Ownership of content and whether the article is kept will be determined by whether those members of the Wikipedia Community believe it satisfies relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

Finally, please be very careful about posting your personal contact information on any Wikipedia pages as explained in Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of personal information and using primary sources. All discussion related to Wikipedia articles should, in principle, take place on Wikipedia; so, it's very unlikely that any editor will contact you via email or phone to discuss things related to articles or Wikipedia in general. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Please return the profile pic

Hi there, I'm responding to your message because I feel really attacked by this website. It feels like every single thing I try to do is overtly examined and criticized when all I wanted to do was help a friend out. His name is Joel Newton, he is a producer who co runs a VR company and he asked if I could set up a wiki page for him and his company. He offered compensation, which I've declared now though I didn't see it necessary at first because it wasn't like I was creating anything major, merely a little info page with pure facts, no bias and references to back it up. Now I understand that Wikipedia wants you to declare external relationships though at the time I didn't realise how serious it was, I'd literally joined Wikipedia just for this so everything was new to me. But having a profile picture removed because you don't think it falls under fair use? Really? What alternative do I have? Why are all the other articles allowed simple pictures of the person in question and I'm not? To put it simply, I think Wikipedia does a terrible job of easing newcomers in. The standards are absurd, it feels like I have to jump through a million hoops just to do a simple thing and all I'm trying to do is make an info page like any other one you'd find. Please, tell me what I'm supposed to do to achieve that, because I've given up trying to do it like a normal human. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone right? How about you upload the profile picture for me? It's clearly far beyond my capability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CongregationDaniel (talk • contribs) 08:07, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I understand that you might be feeling a bit frustrated about way things have been going CongregationDaniel, but I didn't remove any images from the article Joel Newton. You can see who did by looking at the article's page history. I did, however, tagged a file you uploaded for speedy deletion per citerion WP:F7 because Wikipedia's non-free content use policy pretty much never allows a non-free image of a still living person to be upload and used for primary identification purposes as explained in WP:FREER. My suggestion to you would be to contact your friend as see if he can provide a freely licensed image that Wikipedia can use for such a purpose (such ideas on how to do such a thing are given in Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission). Perhaps your friend has an image that he holds the copyright on (be careful here in that the copyright of a photo is generally considered to be own by the person who takes the photo, not the subject of the photo) that he would be willing to agree to release under a free license that Wikipedia accepts.

As to Why are all the other articles allowed simple pictures of the person in question and I'm not?, please see WP:OTHERIMAGE. Not all images are licensed the same and its the way an image is licensed that determines whether and how it can be used. Some of the images you're referring to may actual be ones uploaded to Wikimedia Commons under a free license that Wikipedia accepts, or their might be other things about the particular use which satisfies relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines in a way that the one you uploaded doesn't. Another possibilty could simply be that the other image(s) you saw are ones that aren't allowed and it's just a case that nobody has noticed them yet. If you disagree with what I've posted above and still feel that the file you upload does satisfy relevant Wikipedia policy (please read WP:ITSFAIRUSE and WP:NFC#Background for how Wikipedia's policy differs from fair use), then you can follow the instructions in the template I added to the file's page and explain why by posting on the file's talk page. The administrator who reviews the file will see your post and take it into account when they decide whether the file should be deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

About File:Indian_Summer_2019_Press_Photo.jpeg

Hi there, thank you for your notice on File:Indian_Summer_2019_Press_Photo.jpeg. Looks like I misunderstood the fair-use criterion, will contact the rights holder for release. In the mean time I'm happy for the image to be taken down - PandaSuit2 (talk) 01:29, 30 July 2020 (UTC)