User talk:Y6f&tP4z

Welcome!
Hello, Y6f&#38;tP4z, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Bearian (talk) 20:14, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

For consistency in the "Jack Baker (activist)" article, I would like to make these changes to the introduction:
 * Change James Michael McConnell to "Michael McConnell (born James Michael McConnell)"
 * Copy and paste that change throughout ALL Wikipedia files

Can this be done?

Reason: At a very young age, he informed his mother that he did not like the name James and would never use it. He goes by the name Michael McConnell and uses his first name ONLY for government documents. Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 19:35, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If the name is sourced in published independent reliable sources, sure, do a search and go through and change it manually. Shearonink (talk) 20:32, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Help
I would like to add a photo from the archives of the Minnesota Historical Society to this article. Their policy is Free Use, with credit. Is there someone who can work with me on making it happen? Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * See Uploading images and Declaration of consent for all enquiries . Dru of Id (talk) 13:30, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Uploading images is not clear. What tag describes a non-free, historic photo requiring attribution to the Minnesota Historical Society? Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Y6f&tP4z, according to MHS's website, the copyright will vary for each individual image. Could you link to the specific image you want to upload? Thanks, LegoKontribsTalkM 03:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Shoes poster 1971.tif
Thanks for uploading File:Shoes poster 1971.tif. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Non-free content policy and guideline
Please do not place or replace any non-free images to any pages except for actual articles, as you did at User:Y6f&tP4z/sandbox. Such use is a clear violation of point number 9 of our policy concerning the use of non-free images. Continuing to do so can be viewed as disruptive behaviour and you may be blocked from editing. VernoWhitney (talk) 20:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Jack Baker (activist)
The Supreme Court, when asked to look at Baker v. Nelson, said no. They declined to consider it. They refused to hear it. Writing casually, we might say they refused to decide it. But actually they didn't even get that far. They said no at an earlier stage.

Next week, for example, the Court will hear/consider two same-sex marriage cases. In a few weeks, we'll find out if they want to decide them or not. They may say they have no jurisdiction or someone involved in the case lacks standing, or just bounce the case back to an Appeals court for further consideration. Those would be examples of the Supreme Court saying it didn't want to decide a case.

That Jack Baker (activist) still needs lots of work. Hope you'll help me delete the blather and add some better citations over time. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 16:24, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

you are WRONG
You are mixing apples and oranges. In 1970, the law required the U.S. Supreme Court to accept an appeal from a state court that interpreted a federal statute. The U.S. Supreme Court accepted Baker v. Nelson. It reviewed the case, then entered its decision: "The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question." That is why courts say it is a binding opinion.

Your opinion that the court was "asked to look" at Baker v. Nelson, then "said no" is WRONG. They accepted the case, then dismissed it. In plain English and legal accuracy, they refused to decide it.

I will not help you re-writing history. Please put my correction back. Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 17:15, 21 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You are correct. Notice how easy it is to be nice. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 21:23, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Special character for "comma"
How do I link directly to the heading "Adoption, name change, marriage" in the article Jack Baker (activist)?

The ASCII Table lists "2C" as the Hex equivalent of a comma, but the following link does not work:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Baker_%28activist%29#Adoption%2C_name_change%2C_marriage

What am I doing wrong?


 * Reply from Help Desk:


 * It appears you want to create an external link from outside Wikipedia.
 * Use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Baker_%28activist%29#Adoption.2C_name_change.2C_marriage

Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 16:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

File:McConnell (l) and Baker (r) apply for marriage license 19700518.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:McConnell (l) and Baker (r) apply for marriage license 19700518.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:24, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Shoes poster 1971.tif listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Shoes poster 1971.tif, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

McConnell & Baker
Thank you for the update on the Michael McConnell and Jack Baker article. Is the court opinion cited available online? Is there a news article about it? I've been interested in the story since I heard them speak, bought the book, and took the photos used in the article. Jonathunder (talk) 21:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Q: Is the court opinion cited available online? A: No, perhaps in the future. See "MPA Remote Minnesota Public Access (MPA) Remote offers access to case information via the internet for certain court records in the Minnesota Court Information System (MNCIS). The information is limited as described in the MN Rules of Public Access to Records of the Judicial Branch. Court documents cannot be viewed in MPA Remote at this time."

Q: Is there a news article about it? A: No. Perhaps because the owner of the StarTribune lives in Mankato, MN. Also, the county must pay attorney fees for both sides.

A: I can forward a PDF copy of the court's ORDER. Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 13:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

McConnell & Baker
Note to : you are WRONG

The Minnesota Supreme Court identified its decision as an OPINION because it was interpreting the U.S. Constitution. The court was not "ruling" on the state's constitution; ergo, the OPINION served as guidance to elected Clerks of the various District Courts to ignore such requests because, in its OPINION, denial of the statutory entitlement demanded by gay citizens to marry the adult of one's choice "does not offend the . . . United States Constitution".

At the time, a state's interpretation of federal law allowed a direct appeal to the high court. See Baker v. Nelson.

Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 16:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not a lawyer, but I am pretty sure if that's the case that it shouldn't be all caps.
 * I am interested in the PDF you mentioned in the similar discussion above! = paul2520 (talk) 17:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

- - -

1. The court used all caps. Ergo, it's important to emphasize that it is the Court's OPINION, not mine.

2. See Timeline_of_same-sex_marriage for the PDF that is available from the University of Minnesota Libraries.

Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 17:58, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Are you talking about this document? Where does it say "OPINION" in all-caps? Regardless, I think if a document uses all caps does not mean we want it formatted as such. = paul2520 (talk) 19:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

- - -

1. NO. I'm referring to https://law.justia.com/cases/minnesota/supreme-court/1971/43009-1.html.

2. For accuracy, the court should be allowed to speak for itself. Calling its "OPINION" a ruling does a disservice not only to the court but also to the public.

3. Perhaps clarify with a footnote? [OPINION is how the court titled its decision.]

Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 21:20, 9 July 2020 (UTC). Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 16:33, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

File:1973 Gay Pride.jpg [Request #2]
I filed an Undeletion request to deliver a response to the original request for information.


 * - - - Reply #4


 * Reason: See [Ticket#2020092210007961]. A copyright lawyer concluded that "the copyright law of the United States does not prohibit anyone from posting [that] photograph online, or from creating and posting any derivatives."


 * Y6f&tP4z (talk) 11:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC), thread continued. --Y6f&tP4z (talk) 12:30, 1 November 2020 (UTC), clarify.


 * Ankry replied: This is still a problem, that we need a legal basis for such an opinion. Why can you assume that another lawyer will not give an opposite one? Especially, if heirs of the photographer change their mind and claim copyright in several dozen years. See COM:PCP. Personally, I would not accept such opinion as a PD rationale. Ankry (talk) 10:45, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Ankry did not allow me to respond and to clarify why the applicable U.S.A. law does not justify the action that was taken. Instead, the discussion was closed abruptly.


 * Here is my response. It should be included in the Undeletion request and allowed to be debated and resolved by a neutral panel.


 * - - - Reply #5


 * 1. Copyright law in the U.S.A. does not allow "heirs of the photographer [to] change their mind" because all of their rights "expired on December 31, 2002 per 17 U.S.C. § 303(a)." Please ask your attorney to explain the law cited in Alexander J. Farrell's memorandum, BEST & FLANAGAN law firm, Minneapolis [Ticket#2020092210007961].


 * 2. Your "opinion" of "a [Public Domain] rationale" lacks merit because you did not cite a statute or case law to refute the opinion fully documented by the BEST & FLANAGAN law firm, Minneapolis.


 * 3. It is "we" who is assuming "that another lawyer" may "give an opposite" opinion. The burden of proof rests with "we" to offer proof that another lawyer may justify why 17 U.S.C. § 303(a) is interpreted incorrectly.


 * 4. Otherwise, I am left arguing with my attorney to justify "we's" opinion. When such proof is posted, I will send it to the BEST & FLANAGAN law firm, Minneapolis, for a response.



I need help to appeal this denial of my request to Undelete a photograph whose copyright protection expired on December 31, 2002 per 17 U.S.C. § 303(a).

Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 16:12, 2 November 2020 (UTC). Add clarity to the request Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 20:35, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

- - -
 * This provision is not commonly cited in copyright discussions that I've seen. Wikipedia is allowed to be more restrictive than the letter-of-the-law in deciding what content it will accept. If the photograph can be shown to have entered the public domain, you need to have the discussion on Wikimedia Commons, not here on Wikipedia. Freely licensed content belongs on Commons.  — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 21:16, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
How to appeal action by Elizium23? For two reason deletion of this link is not justified.
 * Video by Logan Chelmo, Posted on YouTube (2021-06-06).

1. From Elizium23's talk page (Friday, 11 June 2021) "I hereby disclose my affiliation with the following organizations
 * Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix
 * Knights of Columbus
 * Trilogy Education Services, a subsidiary of 2U (company)."

2. The deleted link is more relevant that the interview conducted 20 years after the events of someone who admits that she did not attend the events and was not even in Minnesota at the time of the events.
 * Scott Paulsen, "Twin Cities Gay and Lesbian Community Oral History Project", Minnesota Historical Society : Retrieved from Collections Online (2019-06-05 ). --Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 11:57, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


 * The edit summary of the edit in question reads Undid revision 1027934796 by Y6f&tP4z (talk) not an WP:RS, indicating YouTube as being an unreliable, user-generated source – see WP:RSPYT for the explanation of this and relevant discussion. You may want to discuss this with the user themself, though, simply add  to ping them, as the helpme template is reserved for questions about using Wikipedia. I could go on about the various dispute resolution processes, but the first step to solving any problem is discussing it with the offending party to achieve a common ground.  TG  HL ↗  🍁 14:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment #2
As stated above, I disagree with your action to delete the link I posted. Before I invoke the dispute resolution processes, it would be helpful to understand why you insist that my reasons - (1) and (2) - do not justify re-posting of the link. --Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 15:15, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment #3
Because Elizium23 appears to be unwilling to discuss the dispute, a third opinion is needed to decide if deletion was justified.


 * Description of dispute: May the link below be considered a reliable source? It includes an interview with a United Methodist minister about his involvement in an historical event in 1971 plus documentation from the public domain.


 * Video by Logan Chelmo, Posted on YouTube (2021-06-06). --Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 16:27, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment #4
I understand the rationale. Thanks. --Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 11:18, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Original research warning
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Minnesota News Council, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:20, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Looking for File:Gay_Pride . ..
How do I reach "File:Gay_Pride_march_by_Jim_Chalgren,_June_1973.jpg" to add context to unanswered questions? Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 22:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Does this link help?
 * There are probably other ways to get there.  — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 00:24, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Help me!
Please help me with... How do I link to only one of the many videos that are posted on YouTube? Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 13:41, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:YOUTUBE and also WP:RSPYT; you can't just link to any video. I don't know much about the actual process so I'm leaving the request open. 331dot (talk) 15:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Depends on what video you want to link to. If you want to use it as a citation, see the links 331dot replied with. What do you want to add and to what article? SWinxy (talk) 18:12, 23 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you.Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 18:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Help me!
Please help me with... → This fn is cited as source material to prove actions that occurred in Canada. The letter from Rich North to Jack Baker is blocked by Wikipedia.


 * Letter from Rich North to Jack [Baker] & Mike [McConnell] (20 September 2004). Posted by Jack Baker on blogspot: "We now have equal marriage in Manitoba, and our efforts here were a direct result of your leadership in Minnesota."

→ Q #1: Is there a procedure for unblocking the link to that letter? Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 12:29, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * You would need an independent reliable source that reports on the contents of the letter. The letter itself cannot be used as a source, because it is a primary source. 331dot (talk) 12:42, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

→ Q #2: To enable historical research, would it be permissible to attach a comment, e.g.?


 * Wikipedia requires an independent reliable source that reports on its contents. Copy-n-paste the link into a different browser to view the primary source.Y6f&#38;tP4z (talk) 19:14, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Minnesota Free University moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Minnesota Free University, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 13:51, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Minnesota Free University
Hello, Y6f&#38;tP4z. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Minnesota Free University, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)