User talk:Peterfoxny

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

Peter Fox (artist in New York)[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Peter Fox (artist in New York), and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://dumboartscenter.org/silent_auction_18.php. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Peter Fox (artist in New York)[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Peter Fox (artist in New York), but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://dumboartscenter.org/silent_auction_18.php, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Peter Fox (artist in New York)/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Peter Fox (artist in New York) saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In addition to the "form letter" above, I wanted to drop a personal note explaining that we need external verification that this material is free for us to replicate. Since Wikipedia has no process in place for identity verification at account creation, we must ask that you verify by one of the processes set out above. Please let me know at my talk page if you need assistance following through with any of these processes. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your note. The best way to resolve it, since you are unconnected to the identified point of duplication, would be for you to demonstrate through e-mail that you are Peter Fox and that you originally authored that material. We can take your word for you who you are to a certain point, but obviously when it comes to satisfying legal considerations we need something more official. Letters from copyright holders are permanently stored by the Wikimedia Foundation in case our right to use material is ever challenged.
Your case may be slightly complicated, though, if you can't point to a place on the web where that material was published previous to its inclusion at the DUMBO Arts Center. If the DUMBO Arts Center had published the material under your copyright, it would be a simpler matter, but they have their standard "Copyright © 2008 Dumbo Arts Center" on the page. If you don't have a place that you can point to to prove that their text copies you, then the only way to handle the matter may be (strange as it sounds) for you to act as though it is not your copyright and to request and forward permission from the Dumbo Arts Center by the processes set out at Wikipedia:Permission. An e-mail from them releasing their claim to the text would be sufficient. I'm sure that sounds like a foolish idea, given that you are the original copyright holder, but it ultimately comes down to verifiability. The Wikimedia Foundation does not have legal authority on its own to decide that their copyright notice is in error.
Another alternative, and possibly a very good one given the brevity of the text, is simply to rewrite it. The list of galleries at which you've exhibited is not copyrightable, so this would simply involve changing the first few words and the last two sentences into new language. There is a link on the front page of the article to a "temporary" page where you could do that if you would prefer. I should note that there are some problems with this article that might result in its being deleted in its current condition even if the copyright matter is cleared. We have specific guidelines for inclusion of biographies, here, with specific points related to creative professionals. To best secure the article, it needs the addition of reliable sources that verify how it meets those. A couple of newspaper articles or magazine profiles would greatly help. I found this one through a google news search. I see a few others that might relate to you, but they are behind subscription walls so I'm unsure. I presume you are not also the Peter Fox who is the head of the Texas Arts Council. :) I presume you would be familiar with your press enough to know what else might be available.
I also need to let you know, though, that care should be taken with writing any article on a subject that is close to you (see our conflict of interest guidelines), especially autobiography. It can be done, if it is neutral and well sourced to prevent "original research" (a catch all phrase on Wikipedia that includes any material you may know to be true, but can't prove through previously published sources). But Wikipedians in general are highly averse to self-promotion, and in my personal opinion are sometimes overzealous in labeling material that way. Articles on people have to explain why their subjects matter in order to remain on the encyclopedia, but they must do so in a way that they do not cross the neutrality line. It's a delicate balance.
I've responded here in case you do not return before my talk page archives. I'll watchlist your page for a time, so if you'd like to discuss the matter further we can do so here. If you should, however, take a while to come back, please feel free to let me know at my talk page if you'd like to resume the conversation. There is a bit of a learning curve here, but it's not insurmountable. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:45, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Peter Fox OUTPOST detail 2008.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Peter Fox OUTPOST detail 2008.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Peter Fox UNTITLED (JFC3) 2007.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Peter Fox UNTITLED (JFC3) 2007.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

De-di-orphaning  : )[edit]

Both images are now linked to the article and fair-use explanation provided. Di-Orphan tags have been removed. Peterfoxny (talk) 06:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Peter Fox OUTPOST detail 2008.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Peter Fox OUTPOST detail 2008.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Peter Fox UNTITLED (JFC3) 2007.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Peter Fox UNTITLED (JFC3) 2007.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Peterfoxny&oldid=476747522"