User talk:Leopold7

Welcome Leopold7! Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are users!

Hello, Leopold7. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions! I'm Arctic Kangaroo, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge. Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type  here on your talk page, and someone will try to help. Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes   at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp. The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun! To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Mypage/sandbox&action=edit&preload=Template:User_Sandbox/preload create your own private sandbox] for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put  on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.

 Sincerely, Arctic   Kangaroo  14:48, 15 April 2013 (UTC)   [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Arctic_Kangaroo&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Welcome_to_Wikipedia/user-talk_preload (Leave me a message)]

Español

Deutsch

Français

Italiano

עברית

Русский

日本語

Polski

فارسی

Arctic  Kangaroo  14:48, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia!  Puffin  Let's talk! 22:35, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 James Lord Bowes, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! ❤ Yutsi Talk/  Contributions  ( 偉特 ) 15:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Possibly unfree File:James Lord Bowes 1834-99.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:James Lord Bowes 1834-99.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:50, 12 April 2013 (UTC) I have responded to this criticism four times on the 'discussion' page, where it seems no discussion ever takes place, giving the facts of ownership of this image and recieved no reply or useful response. It hardly seems productive to raise an objection and invite debate without returning to the question help me Leopold7 (talk) 12:56, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Please answer these questions (probably on the PUF page, but here is fine):
 * Who took the picture? Can you prove this?
 * Where did you find the picture, if it wasn't taken by you?
 * When did the person who took the picture die?
 * Who owns the copyright to the picture?
 * I'll reply after you answer :) gwickwire  talk editing 17:54, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you GWickwire, I shall again attempt to explain the situation. 1. The person in the photograph was a millionaire, he did not take the photograph, he had someone take it for him. We do not know who this photographer was but it was taken circa 1875 as the subject was born in 1834 and he appears in the photograph to be around forty years of age. 2. A digital copy of the picture from an original family album was given to me by the descendants of the subject, who own the original. 3. I think it a fair assumption that any photographer working circa 1875 is now dead, and has been for some considerable time. 4. The owners of the original picture and I both believe that any copyright has expired, for three reasons: A. The subject (original owner) died in 1899 at the age of 66 years. B. If the photograph was taken circa 1875, as we believe,then it is a fair assumption that the unknown photographer had a similar lifespan to the subject. C. This same image has already been used in various articles and published works - the most important being Japan and Britain after 1859: Creating Cultural Bridges, by Olive Checkland, Routledge Curzon, London 2003. The illustration can be seen there by googling the book title in relation to the name of the subject "James Lord Bowes". Our opinion is that if the original owner died more than 100 years ago, then his descendants (heirs) are the only people who have the right to decide its use: and they have offered the picture for use in the article on their ancestor. If this is not satisfactory to Wikipedia then the picture may be deleted. Thank you Leopold7  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.64.5.115 (talk) 11:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)  Sorry, forgot to log in and sign the aboveLeopold7 (talk) 13:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Help me!
Please help me with...what I think may be the beginnings of a growing editing problem. 1. My page on James Lord Bowes was edited - by whom I am not sure- to include the following "The Adam family were established importers of oranges and soft fruit based in London and Liverpool, William being the manager of their estates in Portugal." I have no objection to this addition as it did relate to the wife of the page subject. 2. A further edit then appeared, adding "Charlotte's brother John Isabel Adam (1857-1919) was also a Wool Broker and worked for John L. Bowes and Brother." This statement, unsupported by citations, seems to me to be an inappropriate incursion into the core subject of the Bowes page as, even if 'John Isabel Adam'could be proven to have worked for JL Bowes and Brother, he formed no part of the story of Bowes any more than did any of his other employees. I believe that detailed information on members of the Adam family should be relocated to a page on the Adam family itself, if one should exist, rather than on the Bowes page which deals exclusively with his history and actions. 3. A further edit then appeared, changing the name of 'Charlotte Vickery Adam' to 'Vicary'. This was an obvious error as her gravestone clearly shows the spelling to be 'Vickery'. I edited it back to 'Vickery'. I think it possible that a descendant of the Adam family may be reponsible for these edits and do not doubt that they believe they are acting in good faith, but feel that a line should be drawn before any other edits arise from this source.

Leopold7 (talk) 14:14, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Don't worry--even though you may have initially created the page, the Wikipedia community, as you probably already know, is comprised of editors, all of whom are adding and removing content. If you have issues with an editors' edits, you should feel free to reach out to the editors whose changes you disagreed with on their talk page and request appropriate citing for their change. If they cannot provide citing, and you cannot find such information anywhere after substantial researching, then you can always undo their edit/remove the information and include a reason (something like "Unsourced content, could not find such information cited elsewhere in a reliable source after researching.") in your edit summary. In such circumstances, when information is not sourced, and you cannot find a source for such information, you should be WP:BOLD (but civil) to revert in an attempt to uphold Wikipedia's guidelines of WP:Verifiability. Also, you can create a new section on the article talk page to discuss the issue if you and the editor appear to have difficulties agreeing (and request other users to chime in on the discussion). Hope that helped, and feel free to reach out to me on my talk page if you have any further questions. --JustBerry (talk) 15:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)