User talk:Ww2censor/Archive27

Talk page • Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 • Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 • Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 • Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 • Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 • Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 • Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 • Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 • Archive 25 • Archive 26 • Archive 27 • Archive 28

Govt TRUMPING thing on Stotesbury WV postmark
The postmark procedes 1976 by a few decades. I recall think the copyright is OVER. Coal town guy (talk) 21:15, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Both the postmark and stamp were issued by the POD prior to USPS copyright effective date of post-1977. Copyright is indeed over and because the image is a slavish copy of a 2D item there is no new copyright to the photographer in US law. The govt public domain licence is freer than the one given by you when you uploaded it. Hope that explains it. ww2censor (talk) 13:58, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks, I am rather new to postmark collecting, they are however a rather very cool way to give authenticity to smaller places in the US, which I do enjoy and know well. Appreciate the reply. As a note, I just redid all of the unincorporated communities in Wyoming that had incorrect postal data as far as PO closures. A few had articles stating that a community had a PO open and in reality it had been closed for over 30 years....Coal town guy (talk) 14:02, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I hope you have some good sources for PO opening and closing dates. Just remember that all post-1977 US stamps are copyright. Postmarks are a different matter if post-1977 but excluding the stamp would solve that problem if it arrives. Are you a member of the WikiProject Philately yet? Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 14:15, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * My grandmother was a postmaster and after the USPS decided to post a good bit of data at the USPS site (specifically, USPS Post Offices by County), I was initially rather happy. There are some large gaps in the more remote and retired places, but it is fun. I might join WikiProject Philately BUT I use post offices as more of a authenticity check than a purist in a great hobby. Coal town guy (talk) 14:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Is that publically available data at USPS? ww2censor (talk) 14:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you might like this it has helped me a bit. Hope it helps youCoal town guy (talk) 14:31, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

List of national postal services
Hello, You reverted my edit on the list of national postal services. You're right the ARCEP is the regulator, but is La Poste the "individual national postal administration"? Indeed since the full liberalization of the sector in 2011 there are others national operators (list) but La Poste remains the designated postal operator according to the UPU (source). So what must this list contain? The postal operator recognized by the UPU (if so, this article is nothing but a duplicate of List of postal entities) or the different national operators? Best regards, A455bcd9 (talk) 13:36, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi A455bcd9. You have brought up some good points here but I think the list has always been seen as the national (my emphasis) postal services list. Most of the others in the list you linked to, though I have not checked them all, appear to be international services that happen to also now, under postal liberalisation, provide some services in France. What services they provide would need checking to see if it is full or partial. If we were to list all operators within a country, based on the number of French ones, the list could be really out of hand. Whether the UPU membership list is essentially a duplicate needs looking at. Perhaps there it is the time to evaluate those listings and maybe consolidate or even them. This need more input from others, so maybe we should talk about it at the WP:WikiProject Philately. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 14:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. I begin a talk on the Project. A455bcd9 (talk) 16:28, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Million Award
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:18, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:St Marys Law Gold.tif)
Thanks for uploading File:St Marys Law Gold.tif. 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. Werieth (talk) 15:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Need help with Law Society of Ireland page
The Law Society of Ireland page has a few issues which I outlined on its Talk page in May but so far I haven't had a response from any editors. Can you help or recommend what my next step should be? I work for the organisation which is why I haven't made more changes. Thanks.FriendlyuserCP (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That's an understatement but I'll try to help you. I'm happy to see you understand conflict of interest but while you may wish to correct mistakes this is best noted on the talk page with appropriate reliable third-party sources that are available. I have moved around a few sections as I think they flow better now. Several of the citations are for subscription only papers and we can't verify the information there. I generally try to avoid the Irish Times and use the Irish Independent instead. Anyway, I made a start on reorganising but it is rather a mess with way too much listing. President seems ok but do we really need Auditors? I'm hidden them for now. You could fill in as many appropriate details on the infobox I added. I suppose the logo is the one displayed here. I can upload it with a fair-use rationale though if it has been the same for more that 70 years since the designer died, it is likely in the public domain. Let me know if you can. I don't know what the Scales of Justice image added to the article so I have removed it and the Vietnam image should be replaced but we dont accept copyright images unless they are freely licenced. You could take you own personal picture and release it under a free licence so we could use that but the images should assist readers understand the topic and not just be decoration. Two images of the building also seems unnecessary. Please remember this is an encyclopaedia not an advertising or promotional vehicle for the organisation you work for; please read WP:NOT. Self published material used as reference is not a good idea and should be used selectively. Are any of the president notable enough to have their own wikipedia article? If so their names should be linked to their own article. I don't have the time to check that sort of detail. The "recent developments" section is not part of the organisation and its information appear to be quite a bit of criticism of the legal Irish profession and the society members, so what should we call it to make more sense of its contents. In fact that section rather overpowers the article but maybe that's the nature of the topic these days though I am sure it could be trimmed somewhat. Is there more information, independently verifiable, about the history and older interesting facts. Hope that helps for now. Please respond with any comments on the article talk page. BTW, was it back in the 1970s the building was completely renovated? I don't recall why but I seem to remember going to visit it an architect I did photography for but nothing would be finished for months so I don't think we did anything. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 22:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help Ww2censor - have submitted some suggested content and references to the law society talk page. FriendlyuserCP (talk) 18:10, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, sorry to intrude, and this is not relevant to the section heading but I just thought I'd mention something that's been bothering me. I've been looking for someone who knows how to raise articles' standards. I saw your comment on the Law society talk page. I raised a few issues myself on the Bankruptcy in Ireland talk page in an effort to improve it (although I'm not in any way involved in the legal profession, I just have some particular knowledge of the subject in question), and the main editor (who is an Irish Lawyer) seemed to take some of my suggestions personally so I decided to back off, however I do feel the article can benefit from my suggestions. I suggested getting a third opinion to that editor but he declined, and as as you know that requires agreement from both parties. I'm concerned that the article will suffer from ownership bias. In addition, I think there may be COI, however the editor took that as a personal insult when that was mentioned by me as a possible way the article might be viewed by other editors (not just by me). Without actually getting involved yourself in that article, perhaps you could just take a quick look at it and clarify for me if any of my concerns were founded? Another opinion, just to me, would be helpful, because, like I said, it still bothers me, even though I've withdrawn from it. Thanks in advance, and sorry again for the intrusion. Jodon |  Talk  16:41, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Jodon, I'm not going to get involved with this one because I don't know anything about the topic except what I read online about Irish people trying to get around the law by going to the UK to file for bankruptcy. I agree with most of your tagging except perhaps the last two. I would WP:AFG that Frank Flanagan, as a solicitor who may well be involved in Irish bankruptcy himself, has likely some COI but not necessarily to a great extent. To be honest I got bored reading the article though it did seem to have a WP:NPOV. Content is based on consensus but edit warring is not the answer either and you can always remind him that he does not WP:OWN the article. Perhaps you should post your concerns at the Ireland WikiProject talk page and hope someone there can assist in balancing out the article. User:Rannpháirtí anaithnid‎ might also be a good person to talk to. Good luck.
 * Many thanks for your reply. I'm glad you mentioned you got bored because that kind of addresses my point about the article's readability. The editor focuses too much on the legislation making it a somewhat difficult read, like a textbook or technical manual rather than an encyclopedia. There are other aspects which he's chosen to ignore, such as a historical background putting Irish bankruptcy law in perspective (i.e. I find it interesting that the whole legislation was not revised by the drafters of the original Irish Constitution when the Irish Free State was formed, thereby giving Irish judges and Irish lawyers the (UK) license and power to abuse the system without having to answer to the (Irish) Constitution). Other aspects, like what you mentioned, called "bankruptcy tourism", a term almost exclusive to Irish bankruptcy, is something many high profile Irish people have taken advantage of, specifically because the bankruptcy laws in this country are so stringent and antiquated.
 * I will consider your suggestion only insofar as it would not involve me, since this would probably result in an edit war. I do think perhaps the article should be split, with the legislation perhaps having its own article as a link/redirect, while the main article should cover a broader palette. Thanks again. Jodon |  Talk  23:48, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mabuska (talk • contribs) 15:30, 7 September 2013‎

Speedy deletion declined: File:Agilone logo.jpg
Hello Ww2censor. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:Agilone logo.jpg, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Does not rely on a page that does not exist. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:21, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:Argyle Social logo.png
Hello Ww2censor. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:Argyle Social logo.png, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Does not rely on a page that does not exist. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joint issue, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Treaty of Amity and Commerce (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) 12:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Lenin Museum in Moscow
I have a bunch of photos I took at the above museum in Soviet times. Will I have a copyright problem if I upload photos of the artwork and statuary? Thanks for your help. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, you will most likely have problems. Artwork is generally covered by the normal copyright periods and for Russia, even in Soviet times, it is normally 70 year pma per copyright of Russia and former Soviet Union. Statuary is usually covers by freedom of panorama and there is no FoP exception for Russia per Russian FoP, so unless you know for certain that the artist died more than 70 years ago images of that artist's work are still copyright. Indoor space in public museums is considered "public space" in Russia. You should however refer to this commons:Category:Russian FOP cases Commons category to see some cases that have and havn't been acceptable. However, if you are illustrating an article about a specific statue, this may well be acceptable on the enwiki under the non-free policy so long as all 10 non-free policy criteria are met and complied with which also means that a fully completed fair-use rationale is completed satisfactorily. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 21:47, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Livingston Award, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Yorker (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) 11:37, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 22:06, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

Alexandria "Blue Boy" Postmaster's Provisional citation reference.
Dear Ww, I disagree that the final paragraph requires a source. That the Alexandria is a provisional stamp is sourced earlier in the article. That the Treskilling Yellow and the One Cent magenta are national postage stamps is common knowledge. And that provisional and national stamps are not the same thing is self-evident.

I provided that paragraph primarily because I thought the Treskilling Yellow and the One Cent magenta should be mentioned and linked--because both, like the Blue Boy, appear on the Philately Portal's list of notable stamps. If you can rewrite the sentence so that it still provides the links but does NOT need sourcing AND, also, does NOT create the misleading impression that all three stamps belong in the same category, please do so! All best,BFolkman (talk) 14:36, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * While you are correct in what you state above, what is necessary to source is the statement you wrote: there is room for disagreement over whether it fully merits placement in the elite category of one-of-a-kind stamps. What reliable source said this about the stamp. As far I as can determine this is WP:OR unless you have a source. That is my gripe. Maybe it would be better for you to just add links in a "see also" section to these other unique stamps instead. I will do some other work on the article.BTW, I think the note to the towns should link to the articles about the stamps not to the towns themselves, if possible. You never responded to my DYK suggestion on the Bears talk page but I think we are now out of time as today would be the last day for nomination. For this reason I tend to write articles in a sandbox and only put them live when I think they are ready and may even ask some others editors to assist before moving to mainspace. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 19:25, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer--I appreciate your point, and would be curious how you might write around it. Sorry I didn't look at the Bears talk page. As far as the towns linked in Alexandria, I agree that links to articles on the other provisionals would be better--but there aren't any, except for the Bears. (There are images on commons.) All bestBFolkman (talk) 20:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Question re copyright on modern stamps
Hi Ww2censor, Apologies for bothering you, but hope you can help. May one use a web-sourced picture of a stamp in a Wikipedia article about what the stamp depicts, especially when the stamp in question was issued in 2010? While editing the articles Napier of Magdala Battery and Fort Rinella, I discovered that Gibraltar and Malta carried out a joint issue of a set of four stamps featuring the 100-ton guns at the two fortifications. I would like to download and use the images, but suspect that they under copyright. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 21:55, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Generally no per WP:NFC #3. Normally copyright stamps are used in articles about the stamps themselves and not to show that a stamp was issued to memorialise a person, place or event unless it complies with all 10 non-free content criteria policy. That can usually be easily explained in prose. Malta and Gibraltar stamps are covered by crown copyright that lasts 50 years. Not great news for you. ww2censor (talk) 22:15, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thought so. Too bad. Would have added nice colour. Thanks. Acad Ronin (talk) 23:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, well as you no doubt know, non-free images are not allowed just for decoration! ww2censor (talk) 23:51, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Blue Boy reorganization
Dear Ww, Thanks for your reorganization. It had, however, one problematic aspect: the reader learned that Type II had "only 39 rosettes" BEFORE being told that Type I (which the Blue Boy exemplifies) has 40 rosettes. To fix this, it was necessary to put the stamp description back in the first paragraph, which I think permissible in a general introduction. In turn, I thought it advisable to reorganize the account of the production--from Postmaster, to newspaper to printing form, rather than jumping back and forth.

Hope you agree. BFolkman (talk) 14:44, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry you think this should be in the first paragraph. I presume that you know the lede is supposed to be a stand alone synopsis of the rest of the article and should not state something that is not in the sections below. I suggest that one of those individual section paragraphs should be expanded to make the point. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 17:35, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Dear Ww, I have done as you suggested (I did not realize that the lede needed to be strictly a synopsis in an article this short). You might notice that some other information from the lede that was not restated in subsequent sections can now be gleaned (the total number of Alexandria Provisionals).  All best BFolkman (talk) 21:49, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * It is not really that short an article and it is not exactly cast in stone but as they state in MOS:LEDE: This page in a nutshell: The lead should define the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight. It is recommended especially per MOS:INTRO in the "introductory text" section amongst other advise in MOS:LEDE. Hope that helps. Good to see you refine the article. ww2censor (talk) 22:08, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Many thanks. Incidentally, the red banner at the bottom of your talk page makes it impossible for me to read the end of this section without going to the edit screen.  Perhaps it's just my e-mail system.  All best, BFolkman (talk) 22:12, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * It's an issue. If I push it down further it goes off the screen but few peoples seem to have any problem that they tell me about. Try an other browser and let me know. For me Chrome, Safari, Opera and Firefox on Mac don't have the problem: all miss the last post's signature though some only just. ww2censor (talk) 22:24, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Law Society of Ireland
Hi, I wanted to let you know that User:FriendlyuserCP has added some new information to this article's talk section. I personally think it looks good and can probably be accepted (I'm willing to add it for FriendlyuserCP) but I wanted to know if you'd like to comment. Cheers! SwisterTwister  talk  04:59, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Using the Law Society's own publications for many statements in not a good idea because they are not reliable third party sources. With other things on my plate and no real interest in the topic itself as well as real life issues, I don't have the time or inclination to refine the article myself but making some additions from those details would probably improve the article. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 09:11, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

HathiTrust
Just a response to your comments on the HathiTrust edition of Grey's Anatomy at WP:MCQ. While they've got tons of digitised books that are still under copyright, these require a login from a subscriber institution; I have to use my university account to view any of them, for example. They even tend to be rather over-strict on this kind of thing, until you consider that they have too much work to do one at a time; for example, I recently had to consult a 1980s edition of the Diplomatic List, produced by the US State Department and thus PD-USGov, but I was absolutely required to enter my university account's login information. With that in mind, along with the fact that it's a university consortium, I'd suggest that we assume that they're correct on any specific book unless we have good evidence to the contrary. Nyttend (talk) 04:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a reasonable argument to me. ww2censor (talk) 13:51, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Question for you
Hi! I'm a bit new to this, but have been a general lurker for a while. Yesterday, I created a new article called LÉ Samuel Beckett (P61). Shortly afterward, you -- seemingly by magic -- found this article and added it to WP:WikiProject Ireland (thank you!). Although I appreciated you helping me that way, I was surprised that you found it at all.. and so quickly! What tools did you use to find this new article so you could attach it to the project? I'm terribly curious. Niamh (talk) 20:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * A bot, now run by User:Bamyers99 searches for articles that may be suitable for the WP:WikiProject Ireland and its results are found at: User:AlexNewArtBot/IrelandSearchResult. Other projects are searched too. Another page that might interest you is Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland/Article alerts. You might want to nominate LÉ Samuel Beckett (P61) for a DYK but it involves a quid pro quo by the nominator but must be started within 5 days of being created. If you have any other questions, just ask. BTW, you may want to tell others something about yourself, or your interests, on your main user page instead of redirecting it to your talk page. Happy editing. ww2censor (talk) 21:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! That was extremely helpful! :)  I'm not sure I want to expose much more about myself on here yet though.  "People named Niamh with a working knowledge of the Navy" is likely not to be a large list as it is.  :)  Niamh (talk) 23:53, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * You can be as selective as you like about what you share on your user page. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 09:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 16:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

RE: Osmonds pictures for Wiki page
Hi Ww2censor. Thank you for your comment and for your support, it's greatly appreciated! I would show you the direct link to the picture if that's okay, so I am not taking the picture as a seperate file. http://www.cdandlp.com/item/2/36357-1201-0-1-0/115045881/osmonds-one-bad-apple.html

I hope this is helpful enough for you. Please let me know if anything else needs to be done.

Snowydream80 (talk) 04:53, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Snowydream80


 * That image can only be used in One Bad Apple, which has no album cover image right now under our non-free policy, but adding it to The Osmonds article is a problem because it does not comply with the non-free criteria. If you were to try and add it to the artist's article there would have to be some sourced critical commentary about the album image itself, not about the album, and there is none unless you know of such commentary. You could just have asked this on the WP:MCQ page where you started this discussion because more editors watch that page. ww2censor (talk) 08:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the late reply. Okay that makes sense but I only just recently joined and you asked if I knew what photo would be uploaded for the One Bad Apple album and I sent a link to you directly on your talk page. But I will also share it on the discussion page as well. I will get used to it, so it will take time.

Thank you for your support. 13:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)~ Snowydream80

Thank You Ww2censor
Thanks so much for deleting the duplicate photo and for your time and energy and thought to help me follow proper wiki procedures and overcome my lack of tech savvy. You suggest I continue our discussion on the MCQ page, but I am not sure how to go to that page. Could yo unease provide this link? Also, I responded to your last message over on my own TalkBack page, as I thought this was the right place to do so... but perhaps not Should I repost my response on the MCQ page? Or will this be repetitive. Please advise. Many thanks. JonathanJonathan Levey (talk) 14:50, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Civil War history on stamps
Post moved from BHG's talk page

I noticed that User‎:TheVirginiaHistorian was working on an article in their sandbox but it was moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American Civil War history on stamps‎. Before the page move I had some concerns about it and was going to do the review but have some questions. Despite all the hard work done by the editor, in my opinion the topic immediately fails Step 2; notability. I have not found any sources that verify the topic itself. It certainly does not have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject and the only thing I can find refers only to the issuing and listing of the stamps in stamp catalogues, which does not suffice. For Step 3; suitability. While reasonably written it really appear to be a directory of the stamps issued a long time after the US civil war, so appears to fail WP:NOTDIRECTORY #1. It also seems to merely be a collection of information, all of which is available in the individual articles, about each of the individuals and events illustrated with stamps. In fact it is just a nice way of making another gallery of stamps, a bit like A Gallery of U. S. Postmasters' Provisional Stamps, 1845-47 which I think should be nominated for deletion per WP:NOTGALLERY, but he has put in quite a lot of prose to not make it appear to be a gallery. Your thoughts are appreciated. ww2censor (talk) 14:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi ww2censor. Long time no see.  I hope you are keeping well :)
 * I see your point. How about converting it to a List of US civil war stamps, with a section for those issued during the war and for those issued after it which related to the war? -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm good and thought you were rather low key these days. I do some other things to ask but at another time. To me a List of US civil war stamps would imply they were from the civil war era when they were issued quite a long time after, so perhaps List of US stamps commemorating the US civil war would be more descriptive but is an ugly title and even that implies commemorative stamps only and not definitive stamps! Essentially most, though not all, of this ground is covered by US Presidents on US postage stamps, Postage stamps and postal history of the Confederate States and the civil war section of Postage stamps and postal history of the United States and other paragraphs of that article. While I am a philatelist and promote that project, using articles as basically an excuse to illustrate a large number of stamps is not wiki's objective which is also why I mentioned A Gallery of U. S. Postmasters' Provisional Stamps, 1845-47. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 16:30, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the notice of the discussion. This is my first effort at initiating a stub, having taken stubs Pauline Maier and Battle of Fort Pulaski to B? class articles. Rjensen, Ghwillickers and another editor at Talk:American Civil War suggested this topic as an article as a subsidiary article to American Civil War. Stamps from the Civil War period are not seen as primary documents by some editors to be included in the ACW article itself.


 * The only comment to date is "I think this is a brilliant idea for an article and the scope of coverage is impressive." But, 1) must have inline citations before mainspace 2) work on images. --- Now it is not to be an article, not a gallery and not a list? I would appreciate your help in crafting the stub for mainspace. Can it be a summary of the Civil War generation, a biography article of significant American personalities who were involved in the Civil War --- and commemorated in stamps for either Civil War or other lifetime achievements. Thanks. (wp:significance?) 11:06, 6 February 2014 (UTC) TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 09:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


 * TheVirginiaHistorian posted on this topic on my talk page. Would you like me to move it all there or can we continue to discuss it here? I'm interested in you latest views on the topic. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 18:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry about my lack of response here. I had looked at this thread a few times, but didn't really think I had much to add.  I meant to post to say that, and I'm sorry for not doing so ... but yes, best to copy it to your talk page. I'd prefer that you copied it rather than move it; just lemme know that you have done so and I will archive this thread. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

End of moved posts

A follow up on the bot notice of the discussion with Brownhairedgirl -- trying not to be defensive, but to make a sincere request for help.

This is my first effort at initiating a stub, having taken stubs Pauline Maier and Battle of Fort Pulaski to B? class articles. Rjensen, Ghwillickers and another editor at Talk:American Civil War suggested this topic as an article as a subsidiary article to American Civil War. Stamps from the Civil War period are not seen as primary documents by some editors to be included in the ACW article itself.

The only comment to date is "I think this is a brilliant idea for an article and the scope of coverage is impressive." But, 1) must have inline citations before mainspace 2) work on images. --- Now it is not to be an article, not a gallery and not a list? I'm sorry, I could not follow the discussion.

I would appreciate your help in crafting the stub for mainspace. Can it be a summary of the Civil War generation, a biography article of significant American personalities who were involved in the Civil War --- and wp:significance is confirmed by commemoration in stamps for either Civil War or other lifetime achievements? Searching here. Thanks. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 11:43, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what you think a stub is but you bandy it around as if it were any article you work on. I really don't know if you know what it is. Try reading WP:STUB. You mention Pauline Maier and Battle of Fort Pulaski but these two were already at least C-class, or even B-class, articles before you even touched them, which confuses me even more when you describe them as stubs. On BHG's talk page you use the term all over the place when referring to various sections of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American Civil War history on stamps.


 * Anyway to get to the nub of the matter, I stated my views fairly clearly on BHG's page to get her opinion because she is a well respected and highly experienced editor who happens to also be an admin, so her opinion was sought before proceeding with a formal review for your article. Don't be offended, you have done trojan work on it and I commend you for that and I am very keen on there being more philatelic articles. Perhaps the advise given to start such an article did not consider one of the most important requirements for any article but in choosing a topic which has no significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject as well as other issues I outlined there, may mean that you have wasted a lot of valuable time unless it can be rescued in some way. I don't see a way of getting over that hurdle. Of course you have lot of citations but they only support the facts contained in the article not of the topic itself. Perhaps there is some way to turn it into a list so it is kept but then it must comply with the List's Manual of style. As this conversation was started on BHG's talk page it might be better to continue it there or move it all here. I will ask her but I really have little else to contribute at this stage. ww2censor (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Pauline Maier on the Revision as of 12:47, 18 October 2010 was a stub before I began contributing to it. It read in its entirety,


 * Pauline Maier, born in 1938 in St. Paul, Minnesota, is the William R. Kenan Jr. Professor of American History at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. A popular scholar of the American Revolution, the preceding era and post-revolutionary America, she holds a bachelor's degree from Radcliffe College, 1960, was a Fulbright Scholar at the London School of Economics the following year and holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University.
 * Maier studied the development of opposition to Britain in the decade before 1776. She notes: "The officers and committee members of the Sons of Liberty were drawn almost entirely from the middle and upper classes of colonial society." She has published a number of critically acclaimed histories, including From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765-1776 (1972), The Old Revolutionaries: Political Lives in the Age of Samuel Adams (1980), and The American People: A History (1986).
 * Before embarking upon her academic career she was a pupil of historian Bernard Bailyn. She currently serves as an academic advisor to the History News Network. She is married to Charles S. Maier, Professor of History at Harvard University. Her father was a firefighter and her mother was a homemaker with five children.


 * That was a stub. Likewise for Battle of Fort Pulaski from 6 May 2011. Sorry. It seems we are not communicating well.
 * As I said before, the subject of the article was suggested by other editors more experienced than myself on the Civil War talk page.
 * In your comment, you object to "no significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" -- the sources must be connected -- or the sources do not apply to the subject. I am providing sources independent of those provided in other WP articles. Perhaps a link to the guideline the quote is taken from could help me? Thanks for your patience.


 * Are we looking for the topic published in other works of reference, such as


 * 1) Dodson, Larry (2006). A Philatelic Tour of the American Civil War (also known as the War between the States). ATA Handbook 155. Arlington, TX: American Topical Association.
 * 2) Time-Life Books. (1995) The Civil War : a collection of U.S. commemorative stamps. Alexandria VA. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)


 * You are correct about Pauline Maier and Battle of Fort Pulaski. BTW, you don't need to quote chapter and verse just to prove the point. A simple statement of fact would have done just as well. I apologise because I did not look back far enough in the history to see you did start work on those two articles when they were stubs. However, you did use the term stub several times in your post to BHG (now copied above) when referring to sections of the new article. I still don't understand what you mean by the term in that context. I also still think that your civil war experienced editors' topic suggestion was made from that stand point and not from a philatelic stance. I see that you have now added two sources. I have not seen, nor have, either, but suspect, from the title and what I know of many other Time-Life books I have, that it is simply a collection the stamps with the stories of the event and people. No doubt something similar to what you are making here. In my opinion the ATA is not independent of the topic; topical philately is their mantra and they produce publications on all sorts of obscure or highly specialised topics, and it is just one source. What about some philatelic press sources? I stand by my comments that the topic itself is does not have sufficiently independent sources that prove the topic notable. As I mentioned, making it a list could quite possibly then make it suitable but as it stands there is no story, it is just a cobbled together collection of individual events and people with stamps to illustrate them, most (I have not checked the all) of which are available to readers in the individual articles. ww2censor (talk) 23:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Re: the story. With the addition of the lead quote from Oliver W. Holmes and narrative from Strauss on the generational participants of the civil war, leaders "Transcendental generation" born 1792 to 1821 and the soldiers "Gilded generation" born 1822-1842 --- Strauss is where I looked for a list of the authors, --- I wonder if the story might be better captured by the title "Civil War generation on stamps"? Thanks. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 07:04, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I am not very tech savvy: I Request your help to keep the black and white photo and page at: Harris Levey
I am sorry. I am not very tech savvy and have trouble sending you the file name. I think it "may" be one of the links below. Hope so. It is the black and white image of my deceased father, Harris levey, sitting at the art table with another man, circa 1940.

Please help me to tag this image properly so that it is not removed and reassure me, if possible, that his page (which respected Wiki editors: OleEnglish and PianTech helped me to properly create some for years ago.

Below are what I think may be the file links to the photo that is slated for deletion: File:Harris_Levey_(aka_Lee_Harris)_at_art_table_circa_1940-43.jpeg


 * image      = Photo_4_Harris_and_Weisinger_Art_table.jpeg

File:Photo_4_Harris_and_Weisinger_Art_table.jpeg

Please note that this photo was given to me as a gift by the deceased owner (my father) and so it seems I incorrectly clicked some tag that showed it as not a personal item that I now own, but an item in the public domain that requires licensing.

I appreciate your timely and knowledgeable help so much at this time sensitive critical juncture. I want to respect all the Wikipededia rules and regulations in order to ensure the Wikipedia integrity, but sometimes I have trouble understanding the technical steps and rules to make sure I am modifying the page correctly. Again, thank you so much for your help! :) Jonathan Jonathan Levey (talk) 14:15, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The second image has already been deleted. I already gave a pretty full and detailed response on the media questions page. Everything you need is there. Who actually own the copyright? You need to answer that first before proceeding any further. There is little use starting another discussion here, few others will see it. So please continue the discussion on the MCQ page so others can possibly reply. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 14:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Hey there. This user is at my talk page requesting help regarding this matter. I could not seem to find your reply to him on at WP:MCQ when following up. Could you perhaps fill me in on the situation or, since you're already involved, reply to him at my talk page? I have OTRS access and can verify any emails on the matter. -- &oelig; &trade; 08:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The discussion has already been archived at: Media copyright questions/Archive/2014/February. Just search the MCQ archive for "Levey" and it turns up. I thought it was all clearly explained. Good luck but ask more if you need to. ww2censor (talk) 10:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

afc
You seem to have replaced the G13 tag I removed from  the AfC Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Khan Bahadur,, as I did not consider it hopeless. I think you probably forgot that nobody can restore a speedy tag, removed by anyone other than the article creator. Your proper recourse is MfD, analogous to what is done if you objected to my removal of any other speedy tag.  DGG ( talk ) 02:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, I forgot about not restoring the tag, so I'll go that direction. It appear you can't fix it either even though you claim it is not hopeless. I don't have the knowledge for it. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 10:21, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Fair use, .TIFF vs. .JPEG files
I am trying to add stamps since 1976 by fair use guidelines of the USPS to Commemoration of the American Civil War on postage stamps using the upload wizard at Wikipedia. File:First Bull Run 2011 U.S. stamp.tiff

I tried three fair usage items, First Bull Run, Irish immigration and Vicksburg battle along the format, but so far I have not been successful in calling up the image. My uploads for older stamps seem going alright on Wikimedia Commons, I have added five stamps there for use at my User:TheVirginiaHistorian/sandbox/U.S.Territories on postage stamps. as well as Nevada statehood for 'commemoration of ACW on postage stamps'.

On the fair use items, I think I omitted category: stamp on the pull down menu for two of them. I tried to resubmit today, is there a notice board that I can ask about the status of my uploads? Will the .tiff format in fair usage work in the fair use wizard -- it seems alright coming over from Wikimedia Commons.

I tried again today, in the title slot, the page automatically adds .tiff to the title, even when I alter the description. The selection at the bottom of the page does not let the upload continue, although all red starred boxes are filled. Mac allows 'Save as' from the default Grab .tiff file to .JPEG file, which I take to be the moral equivalent to .jpg on a PC. Another editor recommended trying .jpg. Am I on the right track for Mac? TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 21:43, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I already saw this discussion on Gwillhicker's talk page. I'm not sure what your problem is but maybe the upload wizard does not like tiffs. What size was your tiff? I remember having difficulty in the commons with a very large tiff and only later realised there is a file size limit but I don't recall what it is or if it is the same for the enwiki. You could try uploading but avoiding the wizard so long as you know what to fill in on the rest of the image details, either for freely licenced image which should go on the commons or non-free images here. Remember that non-free policy "minimal use" does not allow you to just cram as many non-free images as you like onto an article and they can only be used in articles that are in mainspace not userspace, so you may have to wait until it goes live. Anyway try using Special:Upload instead and let me know.


 * I'm really don't know what you mean by all this: Mac allows 'Save as' from the default Grab .tiff file to .JPEG file, which I take to be the moral equivalent to .jpg on a PC. Another editor recommended trying .jpg. Am I on the right track for Mac? There is no "Save as" in the upload forms and you are trying to upload not download. I'm a Mac user and have no difficulty uploading. I sometimes use the wizard if I know it has the options I will be needing but more often I use the Special:Upload page as I know I will have to supply information not provided by the upload wizard.


 * Unfortunately I notice your continuing work on articles that have no real philatelic significance by way of a philatelic story or history but are essentially just a duplicate collection of information already in individual topic articles but illustrated with lots of stamps. Those stamps could just as easily be added to those articles individually. Where are the real details about the stamps not just what a basic catalogue gives? User:TheVirginiaHistorian/sandbox/U.S.Territories on postage stamps appears to be another one that really should be a list article if it is to exist at all. Neither this not the Civil War stamps article provides any significant information about the stamps themselves and what is shown on them. We are an encyclopaedia not a stamp catalogue. For that we have World Stamp Catalogue/United States. It is rather a pity because you seem like a very competent editor who could contribute significantly to serious philatelic knowledge rather than fabricating topics like these that, to me, have no significant notability. But I've mentioned that to you already. Good luck with the uploading. ww2censor (talk) 23:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll try changing the format from .tiff to .jpeg before uploading.


 * Yes, you dismissed the article concept when there were two third party treatments of the ACW on stamps, now there are twelve listed in the bibliography. The discussion at American Civil War Talk was decidedly against using stamps for illustration purposes, which I have seen on other articles as well. I initiated the sandbox draft 'U.S. Territories on postage stamps' in anticipation of the community at 'U.S. Territories' deleting my contribution section Territories on stamps. In fact, I think I read on one style page that any illustration would be preferable to a stamp. ---


 * My rejected submittal at the time at ACW was two likenesses of Andrew Jackson issued by USA and CSA for different purposes. My point was that the stamps were documents of the time which when given context showed each culture of nationalism interpreted his life history differently, according to a) USA: the man who put down the nullifiers or b) CSA: the man who expelled the invader. The consensus was rather than add a stamp to the history article, that there should be an article of the Civil War and stamps --- from the historian community. Now it appears that some in the stamp community are reluctant to mix stamps with history as well. I see knowledge as less compartmentalized, or to put it another way, I am scholastically in over my head. Wikipedia is a collegial enterprise, so I anticipate learning, I expect to grow from interacting with other editors.


 * There is no treatment of the civil war generation together in one place except for Commemoration of the American Civil War on postage stamps, CACWPS. Arguing that the parts of the generation are all comprehended in separate biography articles is rather like arguing the 'United States' article is all comprehended in state articles. True in a way, not true in another. As Richard Jensen (Rjensen) noted in a recently published article http://www.americanhistoryprojects.com/downloads/JMH1812.PDF, Wikipedia does well in describing battles, not so well in addressing social, cultural and technological aspects of military history. Rjensen supports the CACWPS article. The stamps are documents which convey the wp:notable in the general society, as referenced in the CACWPS article, regardless of any cottage publishing industry or school of historiography, --- the encyclopedic article establishes a narrative of larger societal context. The ACW article does not address a like breadth of notable soldiers, volunteers, poets, authors, inventors, documents, technology and events.


 * The article is generated by an interest expressed in the ACW community. Do your reservations relate to the Philately project importance scale? TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 08:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * On another matter. What could you suggest in Wikipedia for a list, gallery or article which would lend itself to systematically accumulating the 50- 100- and 150-year anniversary stamps of states and territories of the United States? Is there something ongoing that I could join in?


 * I notice wikimedia commons lacks the resources to account for commemorating statehood and territories, so I had to upload three of the four images in the 1937 Territories issue. I would use the alphabetical index in the Scott's Specialized Catalogue for a guide for what to look for, the National Postal Museum as the primary online source of images. I've begun by adding Nevada. --- Though the NPM website does not show their image of West Virginia statehood, so a collaborating editor had to supply that from his personal collection in one instance. Interesting thought that Wikipedia might be more readily accessible or more complete for some research purposes. Any guidance would be appreciated so that my efforts can be less contentious, more fruitful. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 08:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Opening of 67th General Debate of General Assembly.jpg
Hello, Ww2censor! First, thank you for adding information. Second: please, can you help me - I can not find a way how to remove the picture to Wikipedia Commons. Please, can you give some instructions? (I've tried to do it by myself, but I couldn't). I would appreciate your help very much,--Sradivojevics (talk) 11:58, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Right at the bottom of the main text body of the "move to commons" box is a link to the commons move helper. Unless you need it there soon, it will get done eventually. If you can't do it, let me know and I'll try. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 12:21, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, I did it! I hope successfully, will see. I didn't move what you wrote (your suggestion). Should I do it? I do not know if I'm allowed. Thank you, --Sradivojevics (talk) 14:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually no, you did not get it done. I've just done it for you now. Where did you want to move what to? Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 16:55, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Upload challenge
My upload of Leif Erikson U.S. stamp prior to 1978 picturing a statue has been challenged as a panorama of Iceland, and so prohibited, at. Any input would be appreciated. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:12, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:GSD Logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:GSD 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. Werieth (talk) 15:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)