User talk:MadeYourReadThis/Archives/2013/March

Orphaned non-free media (File:KKNT logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:KKNT logo.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:45, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nate Johnson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Edward R. Murrow Award (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Urban Sketchers article for deletion?
Dear RadioFan,

Could you please explain what issues do you see with the article Urban Sketchers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Sketchers

This is an English language entry - one of the 8 entries in 8 languages around the world - a collaborative effort. It is also the only one that seems to have a problem, while others translated from this one do not.

We would like to make it work, it would be strange to have the original deleted while translations fair fine.

Thank you for your help.

Alex Zonis Azonis (talk) 02:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * It reads like a promotion for the organization and it's referenced nearly entirely with material created by the organization. That doesn't meet wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion.  Translations are not necessarily fine, the English wikipedia is just better patrolled.--RadioFan (talk) 02:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * What would be the way to make it work in your opinion? Azonis (talk) 02:54, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Time. This seems to be a case of WP:TOOSOON, this might meet notability guidelines at some time, but that time is not now.  There just isn't enough reliable 3rd party sources covering this topic.  This might change in the future and then an article can be written.  --RadioFan (talk) 13:55, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I think I get it what you are saying now - thank you. I thought that thousands people around the world working with a common goal and forming a community was a reliable source. But it is too ambiguous of a source, right? Will the following references help meeting the notability guidelines?

The Art of Urban Sketching: Drawing On Location Around The World - book http://www.amazon.com/Art-Urban-Sketching-Drawing-Location/dp/1592537251

Freehand Drawing and Discovery: Urban Sketching and Concept Drawing for Designers - book http://www.amazon.com/Freehand-Drawing-Discovery-Sketching-Designers/dp/1118232100/

Artist's Journal Workshop: Creating Your Life in Words and Pictures - book http://www.amazon.com/Artists-Journal-Workshop-Creating-Pictures/dp/1440308683

Sketching on Location - textbook http://www.amazon.com/Sketching-Location-Matthew-Brehm/dp/1465205268 Azonis (talk) 15:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Take a look at WP:RS, it better describes what a reliable source is in Wikipedia's eyes. Also, who authored these books?  What is their background?  How familiar are they with this "movement", are they part of it?--RadioFan (talk) 16:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

The first author is the founder of Urban Sketchers. He is an author and a journalist with the Seattle Times. The other three I don't know as closely, I know all of them teach - school, college, etc. They are familiar with the USk concept closely enough to write books/textbooks.

I read WP:RS before I wrote my list of references. In my mind the references I cited fit reliable sources criteria - they are books published by reputable publishing houses. But I would think that because I want it to work - I think it is important for the global art community to have this article up. You have difference perspective and goals, and may come to a different conclusion as a result.

Do you think these are reliable sources? Azonis (talk) 16:36, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * It may seem counter intuitive but its important doesn't help establish notability. This is because of the collective nature of wikipedia.  Claims of importance are subjective. I dont determine notability, you dont notability, everybody does.  Its consensus gained during a discussion like the AFD opened on this article that determine notability.  "Its important" is actually an argument to avoid in discussions.

The first book you mention definitely is not appropriate to use as a reference. It is a primary source since it was written by the founder. The others seem closely tied as well. This whole article seems very promotional. If there were articles written about this movement in magazines, major newspapers, scholarly journal, etc. showing notability here would be easier. --RadioFan (talk) 18:03, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for working with me, RadioFan. I appreciate all your explanations and help. I have added 9 external sources - all independent newspapers and publications from around the world (USA, Canada, Spain, Italy, New Zealand). Hopefully this will add credibility and notability to the article. Azonis (talk) 18:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks for your feedback. Much appreciated.

Thepips (talk) 07:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC) 

Your actions at AfC
Hi RadioFan, I see you've been busy at AfC recently, thankyou! However, I think many of your decisions to accept articles are problematic. To prove notability of a subject, the subject needs to have had significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. You seem to be skipping that very basic requirement in many cases. Your most recently accepted article Guy Schraenen, as an example, is very long but the sources are generally about something else rather than specifically him (this is a regular trick used by authors which you need to get wise to).

Secondly, you need to do some basic clean-up of the articles you approve e.g. add categories or template, basic formatting (e.g. emboldening title), removing old AfC templates, adding Wikproject Biography to talk pages of articles about people... which will at least encourage others to attend to any problems/development. You might like to review for yourself the Reviewing Instructions. Bye for now! Sionk (talk) 16:35, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the note. In the case of Guy Schraenen there were enough references where he was the subject of the source that it passes WP:BIO, yes there were a lot of other references but they were at least tangentially related that it warranted acceptance.

As for cleanup. I'm doing some perhaps not enough. I'm coming from new page patrolling where little cleanup is done so I guess I have to get used to AfC's ways. The articles need not be perfect but they should be readable. Thanks or the note.--RadioFan (talk) 19:53, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe I was being a bit to harsh, I can see you've made some fair decisions. It was a coincidence I came across Smash! (manga), then Guy Schraenen today. Like you say, articles need to have some chance of surviving, they don't need to be perfect. keep up the good work! Sionk (talk) 20:43, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:WBKV logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:WBKV logo.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

AfC Becket Keys School
I noticed you declined my AfC on Becket Keys School. Surely, a Department for Education listing number makes the school notable?

AfC Becket Keys School
I noticed you declined my AfC on Becket Keys School. Surely, a Department for Education listing number makes the school notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesimsmania (talk • contribs) 02:53, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * What schools dont have such a number? This doesn't make the subject notable.  Take a look at WP:N for guidelines on how to demonstrate notability.--RadioFan (talk) 02:58, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Help with Revision - Drugstore band pg
Ref - request help for revision PG: Drugstore Dear RadioFan, Need help, if you've got 5 mins to spare, with revisions made to this page. User Violetcries inavertedly introduced chaos, where once there was order, by adding headers, a lot of unecessary quotes + 1 extra picture w/out copyright. I have now re-edited the whole page, to bring it back roughly to a readable standard - and deleted extra image (not really needed) - but was wondering if you could please check the PG, make sure it all meets wiki, and advise what else needs doing/adding/deleting? Many thanks for your help.Lovelyshopper (talk) 20:00, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:BNR Logo.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:BNR Logo.gif. 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saffron ( music ) ensemble
Hi, just a reminder that you have it marked as under review. — rybec   05:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of new article on William Dana Orcutt
Thanks for reviewing my submission of a new article on William Dana Orcutt. I believe that this subject does meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Nonetheless I have added additional material and sources to my draft article and marked it for re-submission. As I understand the guidelines, multiple sources can be combined (as I have done) to demonstrate that a subject is notable and that a subject "need not be the main topic of the source material." I would welcome any help you wish to provide in terms of reviewing my article again, suggesting further changes, and helping to add this subject to Wikipedia. Thanks again Trevormunoz (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick additional review and article creation Trevormunoz (talk) 22:41, 17 March 2013 (UTC)


 * No problem. Please continue to improve this article.  It's a good start.--RadioFan (talk) 22:46, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Andrey Kasparov
RadioFan,

Thank you for your assessment of the proposed biographical article on Andrey Kasparov. According to your assertion, the article requires more source material pertinent to the subject of the entry; i.e., Andrey Kasparov. Can you please speculate as to what aspects of the existing draft article are adequate and might constitute an article worthy of publication? Furthermore, in the event more source material is not forthcoming, what suggestions can you offer? I am confident Dr. Kasparov is noteworthy enough for inclusion in this encyclopedia, but realize, without adequate or additional references, it my be necessary to abbreviate the entry. I would like the opportunity to bring this draft into alignment with Wikipedia's specifications, for nomination to the index. Thank you, RadioFan, and I look forward to your reply.

Vidi-Visions Productions (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Harry Harrison
Hi. You appear to have made [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/RadioFan&offset=20130324002200&dir=prev&limit=274&target=RadioFan 274 edits] where you changed the correct spelling "Harrison" to the incorrect "Harison". Please fix. -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Crap! Thanks for the heads up, I'll fix.--RadioFan (talk) 14:06, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

speedy
I fully understand the problem with promotional articles, and I very much understand your frustration, which I also feel--all the more so, as dealing with new unsatisfactory articles is the major thing I do here--but they cannot be deleted by speedy on the basis of being somewhat promotional, if they have significant informative content. cf WP:CSD#G11. This applies all the more so to AfC, where there is greater tolerance. I don't think there is any policy about blanking, but I don't care to do it unless in the course of a speedy. If a persistently unacceptable article is being rewritten, and it does not qualify for speedy, there are only two courses: one is to give a personal warning to the ed. involved and hope it is understood--I just did that--; the other is to use MfD. Even for articles like signatureMD, it is possible they are actually notable, and the content in the article was informative. anchor Services is similarly has some informative content, but I do not think it is at all likely to be notable. That, however, is not a reason for deletion at AfC either, tho I would have used A7 in mainspace. I see no real solution to this, except to keep declining until the article is satisfactory.

What makes it easy, of course, is when they are copyvio as well as promotional, but these two do not seem to be.  DGG ( talk ) 04:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That's your decision of course but I felt there was enough copied verbatim for there to be a copyright problem. I'd suggest you at least remove those sections and hide history.--RadioFan (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:S1 space station model.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:S1 space station model.jpg.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Kelly hi! 00:09, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

WyoFile
Hello,

I received your message that our the proposed Wikipedia page WyoFile was not accepted because of the bias presented by my previous username, WhyohWyo. I have since changed it to my real name, Erin Meeker, to remove the appearance of bias.

WyoFile has emerged as one of the leading media outlets in Wyoming. A blog on the web site was actually linked to as a top state legislature blog by the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/03/05/the-fixs-best-state-based-political-blogs-list-is-here/

I have followed the guidelines for sourcing. I would think the link above would establish WyoFile's worth of a Wikipedia page.

Thank you, ErinMeeker (talk) 16:40, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your attention to your username. You seem very knowledgable about WyoFile, what is your connection with the blog?--RadioFan (talk) 18:00, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Sunil Sabharwal
Thank you for generously volunteering to look at the draft submission on Sunil Sabharwal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kate_Robins#cite_note-3

I appreciate that you didn't accept it but hope you will help me understand why so that I can edit appropriately and resubmit. Your note said "citations." Did I list the citations incorrectly or are they poor quality citations? I thought I'd followed the directions. The version you'd sent back to me didn't have the NYT citation (the first). Did you take that out?

With some clarification I'll edit. I look forward to your response and thank you again for your willingness to edit for Wikipedia. Kate Robins Kate Robins (talk) 00:38, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * References which where Sabharwal is the subject of the article are great, those that mention Sabharwal and are essentially about something else aren't so great. The latter doesn't do much to establish notability.  --RadioFan (talk) 01:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:WDNY (AM) logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:WDNY (AM) logo.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 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:59, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:WTOB logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:WTOB logo.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 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:01, 30 March 2013 (UTC)