Jump to content

User talk:NickWilson1964

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

Welcome!

Hello, NickWilson1964, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!--MollyPollyRolly (talk) 02:34, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

A cartoon centipede reads books and types on a laptop.
The Wikipede and the Picture Tutorial. (image credit)

Welcome!

Hello, NickWilson1964, and welcome to Wikipedia! I have noticed that you are fairly new! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I also see that some of your recent edits, such as the ones to the page Pontiac Grand Am, show an interest in the use of images and/or photos on Wikipedia.

Did you know that ...

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  POLITANVM talk 03:18, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Copyright violator spamming my talk page with personal attacks. Thank you. --Sable232 (talk) 18:49, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply] 

I have to ask what personal attack did I do towards you? I read the rules and I don't believe anything I said was within the definition of personal attack.   08/28/2021

Only warning[edit]

Hi - I recognise that you are new here, and so I'm going to give you a personal written warning rather than an automated message. Wikipedia has a very firm policy on personal attacks - it's detailed at WP:NPA. You cannot insult people - it doesn't matter whether it's profane, hate speech, or even just saying 'this guy is stupid' - it's not permitted. If you do it again, your account will be blocked.

Now, if you can actually explain how the photographs appear the way they do, you might be able to convince people that you actually own the copyright to them. They have very obviously been taken by photographing a computer screen, but from looking at them closely, I can see that most of them are taken in the same location, which would lend some credence to your assertion that they were taken in your drive. Rather than shouting at people, if you can explain the situation clearly, we might be able to move forward. Best Girth Summit (blether) 19:23, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to load the original but it said something about not being verified so I took a screen shot of the pictures using my Iphone and loaded them that way. These pictures that were removed have been on the internet for several years all originally posted by me. I have had computer failures in the meanwhile and most of the Studebaker pictures are now on a CD somewhere so I just go back on the internet to some of my original postings and download them from there. i as the poster should have been contacted before the pictures were removed. If you do some research you will find my car and me on TV shows and many other sites. the 1954 Conestoga is a fairly rare car with less than 300 known to be left. I thought I was doing the page a favor by adding another. Sable should have contacted me before he libelously claimed I violated copyright of my own picture. I don't know how to prove they are actually my pictures. The Studebaker in front of the cabin was taken in 2001 at clarion park in Dayton Oh.
Have you looked at your talk page on Commons? It's at this link. Since that's where you uploaded the images, that's where you were notified - you were invited to contribute to the deletion discussion, where you could have explained the situation. You are still able to go over there and explain it - the folk over there have their own copyright policies, they'll be able to give you better advice than I can on what you need to do to prove that you own copyright. I'm only n admin on this project (English-language Wikipedia, not Wikimedia Commons), so my interest here is in the personal attacks you made. Provided that you understand that you can't do that, even if you're really pissed of and frustrated with someone, I'm personally happy to draw a line under this with a warning. Best Girth Summit (blether) 19:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how and can't figure out how to negotiate this stuff. I just saw all these warning because i posted some of my own pictures of my own cars trying to add to some articles. I don't know how to defnd myself and MY pictures.— Preceding unsigned comment added by NickWilson1964 (talk • contribs)
I have to ask I keep hearing personal attack. Can you tell me what I said that was a personal attack. I can't find anything I said to Sable that would fit the description given in the personal attack definition. Please if possible tell me what I said so i won't make the same mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickWilson1964 (talk • contribs)
To get to the Commons discussion, click on the link above to go to your Commons talk page. Scroll down to the bottom, there's a section called 'Notification about possible deletion'. There you'll see a link to 'their entry' - if you click on that, it'll take you to this page, where the images will be discussed. Don't get combative about it - just explain the circumstances under which the pictures were taken, and why you photographed a computer screen. It might help if you provide links to the webpages they came from. I hope that helps. Girth Summit (blether) 20:00, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On the personal attacks thing, you called him an ass. Not OK. Girth Summit (blether) 20:02, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The diffs that were linked in the original post of the AN/I discussion were this one and this one, where you called the editor an ass. It's not the end of the world, but you're really not supposed to do that. The copyright violation thing, well, I can understand how this would be a little insulting, but the amount of absolute crap that gets uploaded here is immense, and we get screwed if someone sues us for copyright infringement. People will literally just post a photo of Mickey Mouse and say it's non-copyrighted because it was them who took the picture, etc... jp×g 20:04, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The personal attack was "what an ass". One thing that you need to understand is that when you contribute a photo to a website covered by conventional copyright, then that photo is restricted by copyright unless that website releases it under an acceptable free license. So, the other editor is 100% correct that there are copyright issues with your photos that need to be resolved at Wikimedia Commons. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nick, I didn’t see the original files that were deleted, but it could be helpful to go to the discussion on Wikimedia Commons that Girth Summit linked to, and calmly explain the situation. Wikimedia Commons is obligated to delete images that appear to be copyright violations, both to protect itself from liability, and to protect creators whose work is posted to Wikimedia Commons without their permission. Also, while Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons tend to be unnecessarily difficult to use for newcomers, if you remain civil, editors will be willing to help.
For these images, it would be helpful to link to the original forum posts that show you’re the owner of these photos (e.g., similar username). Let me know if you have any questions. Also, you can read through Help:Talk pages for how to indent and sign your talk page posts. POLITANVM talk 20:08, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
MY PICTURE POSTED BY ME OF MY CAR IN 2007 What more proof do you need. Do you want the original card from the camera???? http://www.stationwagonforums.com/forums/media/1954-conestoga.624/ NickWilson1964

You post a link to defend my work and it does nothing but take me to some message about 20 some more steps I need to take. Sable323 needs to fix his error. Why are you not holding him responsible???

There is a LIBELOUS statement written by SABLE232 acting as an administrator for English Wikipedia. In this statement he falsely accuses me of being a COPYRIGHT VIOLATOR. I respectfully and publicly ask that this statement be removed. Nick Wilson Richmond Indian on 08/28/2021 at 6:19 Indian time. NickWilson1964

August 2021[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for contravening Wikipedia's harassment policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Girth Summit (blether) 20:50, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry Nick, but what you just did was not OK. I told you very clearly that personal attacks were not acceptable. Lots of editors have reached out to you on your talk page with offers to help you, but you chose to create a userpage that called Sable232 a troll, and go and harangue them again on their talk. Sable232 doesn't know you from Adam - you are a random person on the internet. Your pictures look like copyright violations - we are required by policy to take that kind of thing seriously, Sable did nothing wrong. I know this is a confusing environment for a new user, and I'm sorry that you are getting frustrated by our procedures, but I will not allow you to continue attacking people like that.
This is a short block, and it only applies on English-language Wikipedia. You are still free to go over to Commons and explain the situation there. I strongly advise you not to start insulting Sable over there - you will end up blocked there too, and unable to explain the situation. Girth Summit (blether) 20:56, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is the problem I don't know how to defend myself from someone who falsely accused me of copyright violations And no one was willing to help me with the process.. 5:02 PM 08/28/2021
He single handily ruin my experience by making unfounded assumtions without communicating with me for an explanation.
I think I told you pretty clearly not to insult people. Calling someone a troll is insulting them.
You don't need to defend yourself - nobody is attacking you. Someone has expressed a concern that the images you uploaded aren't compliant with our copyright policies. That may, or may not, be the case - we need to look into it, we can't just take your word for it because you are a random person on the internet (as are we all), and we don't know whether you are familiar with our copyright policies. What you need to do is click on the link you've been given to the deletion discussion on Commons, and explain the situation. Up above, POLITANVM has offered to help you through the process. Just stop being rude about Sable232, they were acting in good faith. Girth Summit (blether) 21:10, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies Politanvm - I copy/pasted your signature, and I think the capitalisation will have caused my ping to fail. Repinging. Girth Summit (blether) 21:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC) [reply]
I don't recall mentioning anyone by name when referring to a troll. So you are asuming that it was him. Assuming is what caused the problem for me in the first place. So I am getting a block and the person who assumed to know who pictures they were without consulting with me is free to carry on. NickWilson1964 5:18 pm 08/28/2021
For God's sake the guy tagged and flagged every single picture I posted and most of them were clearly taken in my drive way some even had the other cars included in the same picture. I don't know the correct term apperantly for someone that followed my every edit and flagged every single one. What would you call a person that did that????
Are you joking? Who else would you have been referring to? No, it's not OK to say 'this unnamed person who did these very specific things is a troll', when it's exceedingly obvious who you're talking about. The longer you keep this up, the less likely people are going to be to want to help you.
I know you're new here, and I do get your frustration, but you need to get it out of your head that you have been wronged. I'm still not sure whether those images are copyright violations - I believe everything you've told me, but our copyright policy is not simple, and unless you know it very well it's very possible to be on the wrong side of it with images taken off the internet, even if you took them and uploaded them yourself. It's all about the licenses that the site you uploaded them to use. That needs to be investigated. Sable232 was being a responsible editor, checking the uploads of a new user and reporting possible violations of policy. It's not your fault that you don't understand the policy yet, but you need to stop taking it personally when the people who do understand it report concerns. Girth Summit (blether) 21:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would call a person who did that a good faith editor dealing with a series of photos with obvious attributes of copyright violations. You are not allowed to call them a troll especially after being warned and it is blindingly obvious who you were referring to. It is incumbent on you and only you to clear up the copyright issues appropriately. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just to try to explain why we're still concerned about copyright - do you know whether you signed away your rights to the pictures when you uploaded them? What are the policies of the websites you uploaded them to? That's the kind of thing we need to investigate. Look at the statement just above the 'Publish changes' button when you edit here - you automatically release the rights to the words you publish here when you click 'Publish changes' under a Creative Commons license. You may have done something similar when you uploaded your work on other sites - we need to look into that before we can accept that. It's not about accusing you of anything, it's about doing due diligence. I hope that helps you understand. Girth Summit (blether) 21:39, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is good faith. Before publicly accusing someone of a crime Copyright Infringement. He simply had to look at the source he sited. You can clearly see my name as owner and my names as the person who uploaded the original picture way back in 2007. http://www.stationwagonforums.com/forums/media/1954-conestoga.624/ NickWilson1964 5:51pm 08/28/2021 He falsely accused me of a crime and that's OK?

No I did not have never signed away any of the rights to my pictures. I have sold the rights at certain venues. See I used to do photography on a professional level. That is why I am so angry about being accused of copyright violation. He should have contacted me with his concerns instead of the causing me all of these issues. This block is ridiculous. Someone's assumptions should never be grounds for causing another stress and discomfort. I was talking about an experience and not a person per say. I don't just assume stuff but I guess that is how the admins roll here. SMH. NickWilson1964

It was a very simple fix. Sable232 should have corrected his mistake. Especially after I explained I could not figure out the process to defend my falsely accused pictures. It was his mistake not mine but the over burdensome process becomes my only resource. NickWilson1964

You really need to cool off. Copyright infringement is not a crime - it is a non criminal civil offense only if proven. The station wagon website identifies the owner of the car as "Nick Wilson" not as the copyright holder of the photo. These things can be cleared up if you drop what comes off to me as a belligerent attitude, show some understanding of our policies, and make your case calmly at Commons. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:29, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As a former professional photographer I can not and will not have Sable232 calling me in a written public statement a COPYRIGHT VIOLATOR. This can do server damage to my reputation. I of requesting of one of the administrator in this discussion to remove or have removed the false libelous statement made by SABLE323 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Copyright_violator_spamming_my_talk_page_with_personal_attacks
My previous statement might be confusing so I will redo it. In the link posted SABLE working as an administrator for English Wikipedia. Makes a false and damming libelous statement. This false statement can possible do damage to my reputation as a photographer. I respectfully ask that SABLE323 or one of the other administrators in this conversation remove the false statement. I can not afford for my reputation to be damaged by such a statement. Thank You Nick Wilson (NickWilson1964) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Copyright_violator_spamming_my_talk_page_with_personal_attacks
For the avoidance of doubt, Sable232 is not an administrator, they're a regular editor like yourself. Cullen and I are admins. Now, I'd be prepared to change the title of that section to 'potential copyright violator', or similar, and I'll explain why: we haven't yet established that you (the person behind this account) is the same person who owns the copyright to those photos. I believe you, but I'm going on good-faith trust, rather than any evidence. Let's be clear - from our perspective, you could be anyone in the world, who has created an account called Nick Wilson, claiming to be the same Nick Wilson who uploaded that picture of a car. We don't know you're the same person. I believe you're the same person, but I don't know that. This is the whole thing we've been trying to tell you - when it comes to copyright pictures from the internet, we are cautious, and we have processes in place to check things out that aren't clear-cut. Best Girth Summit (blether) 22:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would appreciate if someone could explain to me how I can get these pictures posted to the article. I am also a bit of a Conestoga Historian and would love to add to the article. But I am afraid to do so. I simply wanted to add some photos to some articles and Sable323 took it upon himself to flag ever single picture as a copyright violation. That is ridiculous how is someone expected to prove a 20 year old picture that has been changed in name and format is legally thiers? I find it hard to believe that none of you have an issue with him flagging everyone of my pictures. NickWilson1964
Is it possible for SABLE323 to somehow correct the mistake he made? NickWilson1964
Sable232 didn't make a mistake, and you really need to stop complaining about them. They flagged questionable content. It wasn't even Sable who deleted them - Commons administrators looked at the flags, and agreed that the copyright issue was serious enough to warrant deletion. What you need to do if you want the images to be retained is go to the deletion discussion on Commons. I think you've been given links to it twice already, but here's another one: link. Explain what you have done, and why you have done it. People over there should then give you advice on what you need to do to comply with their policies and procedures. Girth Summit (blether) 23:22, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Girth Summit: Per the deletion discussion on Commons (and the proof that Nick's given there that it was his photo), would it be acceptable for me to remove the copyvio notice from the talk page (at least here)? jp×g 20:56, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
JPxG, sure, I don't see why not - I'm glad the copyright has been established, and the users over on Commons have been able to give some tips on uploading the original images too - a good result all around. I'd also be happy for the block to be lifted early, so long as Nick indicates that they're not going to make any further comments about Sable232. Girth Summit (blether) 21:03, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hope maybe the next time someone thinks there is a violation that they first reach out to the original poster for an explination and maybe to give some helpful guidance. NickWilson1964 (talk) 21:33, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
NickWilson1964, copyright violations are not infrequent on Wikimedia Commons, and the images you uploaded showed clear warning signs. If some random person took your images and uploaded them claiming them as their own, how would you feel? I suspect you wouldn't like it. That's one of the reasons Wikimedia takes copyright seriously, to protect content creators - in this case, you. Now, in this case it was a "false positive" - but you still have the opportunity to upload the original photos, and nobody has lost anything. If we erred on the side of retaining questionable content, the risk is that someone's work is being infringed upon for an indeterminate amount of time. I took the normal steps to correct what appeared in every respect to be a copyright problem. It was not intended to disparage you in any way, and I'm sorry that it came across in that manner.

It appears that editors at Commons have helped you with getting things uploaded. Going forward, you will find some helpful information in our image quality guidelines on what kinds of images should and shouldn't be used in Wikipedia automotive articles. --Sable232 (talk) 23:21, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add something else Nick. I know you're unfamiliar with the environment here, and I understand you being offended, but please read what I have to say and take it on board. On this project, we get hundreds of potential copyright violations every day. The backlog of potential issues we have to deal with runs to tens of thousands. We are all volunteers, we do this as a hobby, and there aren't very many of us with an interest in copyright issues. We can't stop to have a friendly chat every time a new user uploads a file that looks like it might be a copyright violation. If we see a potential violation, we tag it for investigation, as Sable232 did. As you have discovered, once files are tagged, the uploader can prevent deletion by demonstrating owenership.
You're a professional photographer - how would you feel if you found out that a random person on the internet created an account in your name, uploaded your photographs without your permission, and that we had just taken their word for it without asking any questions? That kind of thing would be an infringement on your rights, and it happens here very frequently. All Sable232 did was tag files, in good faith, in hopes of protecting the right of their owner. Yes, it turns out that you were the owner, but they weren't to know that. So please, accept that while Sable232's actions have caused you a certain amount of frustration, they were literally doing it to protect your rights to those images. You earlier labelled them an ass, and a troll - I actually think that you owe them an apology for that. Best Girth Summit (blether) 23:43, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IMO this Subject is closed thanks to all who helped resolve this issue.NickWilson1964 (talk) 23:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK - the block is rescinded. I guess I can't force you to apologise to Sable232 (and a forced apology is worthless anyway), but in my opinion you owe them one. Do with that what you will. You are now unblocked, and free to reinstate your images. Please bear in mind the warnings you have been given about personal attacks. Best Girth Summit (blether) 00:13, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is It possible to recreate my user page? If so how do I go about it?NickWilson1964 (talk) 16:45, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome to recreate your user page. Click on the following link: User:NickWilson1964. You can simply type into the editing window. Bear in mind what happened last time you spoke in derogatory terms about another volunteer editor however - I'm not saying that you can't speak about your experiences here, but you need to do it in a balanced manner, without insulting anyone. Please do take a look at WP:TPG to learn about how to indent your posts, and start signing them. Best Girth Summit (blether) 10:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edit checkbox[edit]

Hi Nick, I’m glad the previous thread is resolved. A small thing I want to make you aware of is the “minor edit” checkbox. The checkbox is just meant for things like fixing typos, reverting obvious vandalism, minor formatting, etc. Adding content (like an image) wouldn’t be considered minor. WP:MINOR has more detail about the checkbox. That might be one reason ClueBot thought your edit was vandalism (adding an image and marking it as minor). Best, Politanvm talk 23:05, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you there is a lot to learn I appriciate your helpNickWilson1964 (talk) 00:41, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing! One other note is that you can (and should) use “:” to indent your talk messages. As an example:
 First message ~~~~
 :Response to first message ~~~~
 ::Response to second message ~~~~
This helps editors follow discussions. There’s more detail at Help:Talk pages. Let me know if you’re having trouble with the formatting. Best, Politanvm talk 23:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NickWilson1964&oldid=1042401322"