User talk:TMRhistory

Which webpage?
Say, TMPR, you say there's a link to a particular webpage with this edit -- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_Yorker_Staats-Zeitung&diff=next&oldid=494405307 -- what is the page (url type) you are referring to? Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 03:21, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The Neumann biography page is at Gustavus Adolphus Neumann; full URL is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustavus_Adolphus_Neumann. --TMRhistory (talk) 02:59, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but I'm still confused. You say "'History of a New York City Institution', retrieved from the Staats-Zeitung web site on April 15, 2012. The information provided on this web page is not referenced to primary sources and sometimes conflicts in details (such as dates or spellings) with known reliable sources." in your edit.  Which Staats-Zeitung page are you referring to? I'm trying to figure out the edit you made. --S. Rich (talk) 03:05, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry. I made several housekeeping edits at the same time that did not add new links.  It's a little confusing when looking at the side-by-side comparison, I guess.  The "History" reference was already in the article, but I moved the primary reference to the top paragraph to support the circulation comparison.  The Staats-Zeitung website URL is called out in footnote reference (1) and provided as an External Link; the "History" subpage is obvious from the main page of their website.  The direct link to the Staats-Zeitung History page, which was previously a general link in the footnote references section, was moved to the external link section in parallel with the website link, since it didn't seem to make much sense to have the page mentioned twice under "references".  It also may potentially change, so it is not as realiable as a factual reference, which is why I indicated a particular capture date (as per Wikipedia recommendations) in the footnote rather than providing an active URL.  I think this all makes the article (not the edits) more readable, but if you think not let me know and I'll try to untangle any confusion.  --TMRhistory (talk) 04:03, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Tusten Baptist Church 2008.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Tusten Baptist Church 2008.jpg, which you've sourced to Susan Strebel Jones. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

>> The image was well-attributed and it was clearly marked on the file upload form that formal permission could be provided if requested. That is one of the submission options. A one-week deletion ultimatum under such circumstances doesn't seem very polite.TMRhistory (talk) 17:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC)