User talk:Salvatore42

Welcome!

Hello, Salvatore42, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Astropiano Films, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. 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 helpme on this 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 Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Astropiano Films


A tag has been placed on Astropiano Films requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Vanessa O'Brien, fastest woman to climb Seven Summits.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Vanessa O'Brien, fastest woman to climb Seven Summits.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 00:55, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Vanessa O'Brien, fastest woman to climb Seven Summits.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Vanessa O'Brien, fastest woman to climb Seven Summits.jpg

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 04:25, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Vanessa O'Brien, fastest woman to climb Seven Summits.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Vanessa O'Brien, fastest woman to climb Seven Summits.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Eeekster (talk) 23:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

License for Vanessa O'Brien image
Greetings! I see you've added File:Vanessa-OBrien-South-Pole.jpg to the Vanessa O'Brien article. However, where do you see that the image is under a CC-BY-SA 3.0 license? On the source page, I see a generic copyright notice, which implies an all-rights-reserved license. —C.Fred (talk) 23:59, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello. My apologies, I have followed all instructions set forth by Wikipedia many, many times and continuously get images deleted for different reasons that now seem to contradict themselves. I am at a loss. The photo I uploaded says its free to use for "press, media, or encyclopedia websites like Wikipedia" directly on the source website. And I have seen this photo in a ton of external sources and other websites. I have tried uploading photos using all options under the license and every time the photo gets deleted, so I just do not know what to do anymore if photos keep getting deleted, no matter what license I choose, that are clearly okay to use based on the language on the person's official website that says its okay to use on sites like Wikipedia. If you could offer advice or suggestions that would prevent me from getting photos deleted, it would be greatly appreciated. I just don't see why I would continue trying to help Wikipedia grow if stuff gets deleted for contradictory reasons by different users. Thank you in advance for your feedback.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salvatore42 (talk • contribs)


 * Where do you see that on the website? Further, the license terms you've used imply that the image is free for any purpose, including commercial reuse, which is inconsistent with what you're saying the terms are. —C.Fred (talk) 00:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I see the text. The problem is, Wikipedia doesn't recognize a "free to use on Wikipedia" license as free enough. Because of the possibility of commercial products based on Wikipedia, free images on Commons have to be free to use. That image of O'Brien cannot be uploaded to Commons. It might be able to be uploaded to the English Wikipedia, but it would have to meet the criteria for use of non-free content. —C.Fred (talk) 00:31, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for uploading File:Vanessa O'Brien, standing next to the metallic sphere on a plinth in the Ceremonial South Pole, near the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.jpg. However, you had an incorrect license tag on the image. I checked O'Brien's website again, and nowhere did I see a Creative Commons license message. I've changed the license terms to note that the image is not free, although O'Brien has granted rights for it to be used on Wikipedia. I've also provided a fair use rationale to justify why using the image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. —C.Fred (talk) 00:47, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me with this. I read all the information I could find on Wikipedia about uploading images and licenses and thought I fully understood everything, but now I understand this more after reading about what you did. For this photo, and in the future, when trying to add photos to Wikipedia about people, should I reach out and contact the individual using the contact information they provide on their website and ask them permission directly, or advise them to add language to the photo on their website to say they have a Creative Commons license for their photos? Or is it easier/safer to just provide a fair use rationale to justify why using the image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy? I will do whatever you advise since you appear to be a subject matter expert on Wikipedia and photos, ad I want to ensure Wikipedia has accurate and allowed information. Thank you.


 * It depends on the image and the subject. As a rule, images of a living person can only be used in an article if they are free photos. (The photo of O'Brien is an exception because it documents her at the South Pole.) In those cases, it would be best to reach out the rights holder of the image to ask if they'll license the image under CC-BY-SA-3.0 or some other free license. The rights holder can then either change the copyright statement on the image page, or they can contact Wikipedia directly via the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials.


 * If the rights can't be obtained, the image may still be usable under fair use. If a free image is available or obtainable, a non-free image cannot be used (hence the general prohibition about non-free images of living people). There are other guidelines, including making sure as a little of the image is used as possible, that the image serves a necessary purpose and isn't just decoration, and that our use doesn't impede the rights holder's commercial use of the image.


 * All that said, the rules for non-free images can be complex, so if you're ever unsure, it's a good idea to ask for help. There are always editors glad to help out, and it shows that you're aware of the guidelines and are trying to make sure you follow them with your image uploads. —C.Fred (talk) 02:42, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Vanessa O'Brien, standing next to the metallic sphere on a plinth in the Ceremonial South Pole, near the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Vanessa O'Brien, standing next to the metallic sphere on a plinth in the Ceremonial South Pole, near the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:08, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mark of the Dog Rose


A tag has been placed on Mark of the Dog Rose, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It appears to be a clear copyright infringement of examiner.com/article/mark-of-the-dog-rose-to-premiere-sunday-october-13th-at-the-regent-arlington. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Primefac (talk) 11:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Venus Mars Project, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Extreme. 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) 09:08, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jing Wang (mountaineer), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sherpa and Gumba. 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) 10:41, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Vanessa OBrien
You undid factual revisions I made to her entry based on HER requiring you to remove them I suspect which Salvatore42 goes against every ethics rule of Wikipedia. The facts are represented by links to newspaper articles about her family and her brother. None of the information I listed was slanderous, libelous or harmful, and I grew up with Vanessa aka Monica Wojcik in Grosse Pointe myself. You need to answer why today you removed factual info from her bio and what YOUR relationship to Vanessa Monica is. Otherwise I will report you to Wikipedia for ethics violation. So we can keep going and undoing each others' revisions forever, but the FACTS remain. Shhe was born Monica Wojcik, her brother died in a terrible boating accident, and she was very involved here in the punk avant garde music fashion scene in the 80s detroit punk underground movement. If you do not believe me, ASK HER. JaxForth (talk) 20:22, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Vanessa O&#39;Brien, standing next to the metallic sphere on a plinth in the Ceremonial South Pole, near the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Vanessa O&. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:52, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

K2
Hi Salvatore, Thanks for explanation in the O'Brien edit summary. I appreciate that. Also your point about Julie Tullis, whom I'd overlooked. Have you got a link to the rules by the RGS & Alpine Club? Ericoides (talk) 07:47, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of LJ Music for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LJ Music is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/LJ Music until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. PK650 (talk) 06:19, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Conflict-of-interest/paid editing
Per WP:PAID and WP:COI, do you have any declarations to make? The Jim Clash article seems a bit promo-ish. OhNo itsJamie Talk 02:52, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi OhNo itsJamie. I am sorry for the trouble. I have no declarations to make. I do not know him nor have I ever met or spoken to him. I noticed the the Orphan flag on his page and it said to introduce a link back to this page from another Wikipedia article. I thought that meant I was supposed to find another Wikipedia article where I thought he should be listed, and once adding him to that article, I should come back to his article and delete the Orphan tag. Was I not supposed to do that? I was following the instructions of the Orphan tag blurb. Salvatore42 (talk) 03:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you mean; you created this page, so there would be no "orphan flag on his page." The only article that links to his page is Laurel, Maryland, because you added that link.

Are you being paid or otherwise compensated for any of the articles you've created? OhNo itsJamie Talk 04:14, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi OhNo itsJamie . Sorry for the confusion. Regarding your first message, I did create the page. On April 14, another Wikipedia user added the Orphan flag. I just noticed it today. So I followed the instructions on the Orphan Flag and then deleted the Orphan Flag, and then a few minutes later I received the note from you. Regarding your second message, no, I am not being paid or compensated for anything I do on Wikipedia. I am just trying to contribute to the Wikipedia community and add or edit articles that I find sources for that could help build the community. Salvatore42 (talk) 04:27, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * If I've misjudged your edits, I apologize. We deal with a large amount of paid/COI editing, most of it undisclosed. There's nothing wrong with the Clash article per se, but when I look at the content, two scenarios come to mind: (1) someone spent a significant amount of time researching and sourcing every one of Clash's accomplishments or (2) Clash or his representatives provided a CV to a paid editor with a list of accomplishments, who then sourced them all. I'd like to think that it's (1), but I'm seeking the opinions of others to weigh in on their assessments. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:43, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi OhNo itsJamie . No apologies needed at all. I'm happy there are Wikipedia Administrators like you who keep track of this. Should I also look at articles to see if this is happening with other users? Or is that a special designation only qualifying Wikipedia users can obtain? For this article, I can say without equivocation it is (1). The reason there are so many sources is because I thought Wikipedia articles must have tons of sources. I thought Wikipedia likes tons of sources. Every page on Google I found on Jim let me to another page with more information, and then another, and so on, and I guess I got carried away. I could have made the article much smaller, and in hindsight I probably should have. I will make sure to limit the number of sources I use in future articles and edits I decide to work on for Wikipedia. Sorry again for the trouble.
 * Per WP:AGF, I'm inclined to take your word for it. It wasn't the number of sources that caught my attention, but rather the way in which it was presented (a list of accomplishments, rather than prose highlighting some of the accomplishments). The "list of accomplishments" pattern is a common pattern we see with paid editing, where an editor is given a list by the subject. There's no issues with having a lot of high-quality sources. I've removed the COI tag, but the "primary sources" tag is still relevant, as a large share of the sources are the articles that Clash wrote. It may be preferable to highlight some of those accomplishments/articles in prose rather than to enumerate all of them. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 15:15, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi OhNo itsJamie . I understand what you mean by most of the sources being articles he wrote. Ugh, this is my fault. I was being lazy. I assumed since the article was on a credible publication like Forbes, that even though he wrote the article, it was written by him without bias. Your suggestion for writing it in prose is a much better idea. Honestly, I think I need to spend some time reviewing Wikipedia guidelines for writing better articles. I'm going to review the Wikipedia Project Pages for "Contributing to Wikipedia" and "Good articles" today, and then tomorrow I will adjust Jim's page so it's not just a large list of accomplishments, but rather much smaller paragraphs in prose. And I will also delete many of these that are not that notable. I definitely included way too many. Thank you again for your help and guidance.
 * Would you mind addressing this question on MERC-C's page? OhNo itsJamie Talk 20:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi OhNo itsJamie . Yes of course. I just replied a few minutes ago. Thank you for letting me know.
 * I looked at some of the articles you created that were subsequently deleted; it seems a bit implausible that you just stumbled across Mark of the Dog Rose and thought it was notable enough for a Wikipedia article (after also trying to create an article about the film company that produced it); neither seem close to notable. OhNo itsJamie Talk 20:48, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi OhNo itsJamie . I recall this was a movie that was part of a film company in my state of Massachusetts. I followed them on social media saw it got added to the IMDB, and I thought that made it credible/notable so I wrote the Wikipedia article. I never met or spoke with them. It was being added to the IMDB that made me decide to write it. I don't remember why it got deleted but I didn't fight it. Do you think it needed more than just IMDB recognition? Do you think it would be okay to add it back again?
 * Being on IMDB counts very little toward notability. OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:21, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi OhNo itsJamie . I'm not doing too well with Wikipedia right now. I need to re-educate myself more with it. I do admit that I most likely would not have heard of the movie if the company did not appear on local news. I saw it on so many Boston social media channels back when it came out. If you don't mind me asking, is it considered a bias if I write an article about an individual or organization that I initially find out about from local news stations covering it (not national news stations?) Does that make me appear to have geographical bias or some kind of location-based bias Salvatore42 (talk) 21:27, 28 April 2020 (UTC)?

Proposed deletion of Matt Johnson (country singer)


The article Matt Johnson (country singer) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Citations do not meet WP:GNG."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GMH Melbourne (talk) 04:22, 16 March 2024 (UTC)