Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 March 31

= March 31 =

Review of User:Karenp213/Frantisek Reichental (aka Frank Reichenthal) Painter, Fine Artist (1895-1971)
How do we use a picture in an article if we own the copyright to it?Karenp213 (talk) 02:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * If you own the copyright and are willing to release the photo under a free license that allows everybody to reuse it for any purpose, you can upload it to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. Of course you'll have to provide appropriate licensing information, and it may be a good idea to send a confirming email to [mailto:permissions-commons@wikimedia.org permissions-commons@wikimedia.org]. See WP:Donating copyrighted materials for details and WP:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for an example release form. Huon (talk) 02:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Jackson
I am trying to create a page for an established writer/producer in Television and Film. It was denied by a reviewer on the grounds that there was no reliable information source. In fact, the established source I provided is IMDB, which is used industry-wide as THE source of information. I'm not sure what else could be used to verify if IMDB isn't.

The IMDB link is here:

However, other links to verify the credibility of this person can be found here:

And, finally, a google search using Paul's name with his writing partner, Tony Blake.

I don't know if it helps, but I have personally worked with and Paul Jackson on several projects.

If there is something that is missing, please advise (and please excuse any formatting errors I might have made here). Thank you.

Steven L. SearsFSUWriter (talk) 08:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Steven. I'm afraid neither IMDB nor Wikia are considered reliable sources for Wikipedia, as either of them can be changed by anyone. An incomplete list of sources considered generally reliable for topics related to movies can be found at WikiProject Film/Resources. It would be better to incorporate sources into your article draft, rather than listing them here. Remember that, in order to prove that someone is notable by Wikipedia's standards, each source needs to discuss or describe the person or their activities in detail, not just mention them in passing or confirm that they are credited as a writer or producer for a particular work. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * One of those sources seems to be blacklisted. Huon (talk) 14:32, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Martha Blackman
How can I submit Martha's photo? Also, the article I submitted was derived from a German wikipedia article dated back to mid 2000, and was wiped out by someone in de.wikipedia.org who claimed "lack of reference". But all musicians of Martha's era did not have "reference". Every single of one them, Noah Greenberg, Bernard Krainis, August Wenzinger, Josef Ulsamer. Martha has more reference than many others. I find it strange. I could not contact the person who wiped that article out and asked for the reason. The explaination is "discorgraphy", but then if you do a search at amazon.com or cduniverse now, you can easily find CDs or recordings of her.

I have lots of her personal papers, so I can testify that whoever wrote the original German article got the facts right. In fact, it was a little bit of a simplified version; such as instead of locating her Fulbright studies at Hochschule für Musik Freiburg, it only listed as "in Freiburg". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alcatrazhack (talk • contribs) 08:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I was unable to establish what your question was about your articles for creation draft. WP:42 will tell you what is required for an articles for creation draft to be accepted.

In that case the article is fully qualified. I am trying to figure out how to submit the article. It is very confusing. Draft is complete.


 * Regarding a photo of Martha Blackman, if you own the copyright to one (for example, you photographed her using your own camera), and wish to freely license it, you could upload it at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:34, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Will insert after article is accepted.

Is it possible to have the article accepted first, then I polish it? I am very confused as to the submit process. The submit part of the article seemed to be unable to change to the draft version, which is the version I want to submit.


 * You currently have three copies of your draft on the same page; you should remove the outdated ones to avoid confusion (use the "edit" tab at the top of the page to edit all of it at once and remove the redundant parts). Furthermore, your draft is very short on reliable sources, and even worse, its content is partly contradicted by the source; other parts are simply not mentioned in the source. All Wikipedia content must be backed up by reliable sources. If no such sources exist, Blackman may not be notable enough for an article. In its current state we cannot accept the submission. Of course accepted articles can still be improved further. Huon (talk) 18:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I think I have finished the basic so far. I have quite a bit of "reference" as sources and clean them up, so the contradiction is now gone.  SHe was extremely active in 1954-56 so she appeared in multiple shows and involved in multiple groups/symphonies.  Anyway, the references, mostly from Newspapers, some from Universities Student bulletin, some from University brochure, are all there, including her bio.  They are starting to become redundant.  I found old newspaper archive mentioning her show from San Francisco to Princeton, so there is no point of listing them all.

If you look at her colleague, Bernard_Krainis, you will find he has virtually no references compare with her. Samething applies to most of her 1950s colleagues. Russell Oberlin is not a whole lot better. I have more than one photo of her. Is this enough?Alcatrazhack (talk) 22:42, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm rather skeptical of many of the sources. The discography and the article written by Blackman are not independent, and the various bulletins and the lone newspaper article look like routine events coverage to me, something that, per WP:N, explicitly does not bestow notability. I don't think 71 boxes stored in New York count as a published source, and even if they did, we should be a little more specific. I have doubts about the independence of that source, too. That leaves us with Gollin's book, indeed a reliable, independent source that covers Blackman in quite some detail - but not in as much detail as would be necessary to support all the draft's content, and as I said above, it even contradicts parts of the draft. On its own this lone good source is not enough to establish Blackman's notability. Regarding the other articles you point to: Other problematic articles exist, but that's no reason to create more. Each submission must stand on its own merits. Huon (talk) 01:29, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Then how come Kraiinis pass the test? What is the difference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alcatrazhack (talk • contribs) 03:42, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Maybe Kraiinis shouldn't have an article either. He does have some New York Times coverage, though. Huon (talk) 03:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Krainis is the first major recorder player in the US. The problem of all of these personnel is that they are now almost 50 and 60 years away from their most important pioneer work. There was no biography and study on them. A lot of stories came from students of the students of the student, usually at least 3 generations. I happen to have Martha's paperwork. This is a major reason why I want to enter her in an entry, because once her entry is shown, it will start to link up her generation, which is three generations before the current establish teacher/performance generations. Another example of Russell Oberlin. Hert influence is felt by the current professors emerita, with Alex Silbiger free admit to me about his admiration of her when he was still a younger student in Columbia university. Finally if Krainis has NY Times covergae, how9 come the Oakland Tribune coverage for Martha is not enough?

As for the contradiction, can you point it out for me? Maybe I can straighten it out, or get rid of the facts. There is problems about the Gollin's book too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alcatrazhack (talk • contribs) 03:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * If their pioneer work was not the subject of published studies, maybe it wasn't all that important. Wikipedia is not the place for students' stories nor for the paperwork of the subjects themselves - those aren't the independent sources we're looking for. Regarding Krainis, I'm not at all convinced he's notable enough for an encyclopedia article, but the New York Times piece seems to focus on him (in fact it seems to be an obituary) while the Oakland Tribune article seems to be routine events coverage of the "Tomorrow playing in Oakland" variety. If that's indeed the case (I haven't tried to access either article), the former would be considered more significant.
 * The contradiction is the place of birth. Gollin says on p. 215: "Martha Blackman, born in Chicago, had studied cello at The Juilliard School..." Your draft says she was born in Dallas. Huon (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That is why I wrote that the Gollin's book has problems. Not just Martha.  Do we rely on a book that has researh problem, or do we rely from the horse's mouth or personal papers?  As for the pioneer not being important, I don't see it that way.  The pioneers have no bio or report because they are before their respective instrument societies were established, which are usually late 60s.  Those few that left that fingerprints are from Europe, immigrating to the US, so they already have the press coverage.  Their contributions are actually not that much.  By not indicating the correct pioneers, years from now people will get the wrong info.  So the question is not really about notability, bur rather truth.  One great example is Wanda Landowska (harpsichord), which we now thought that she is the pioneer, in truth she was not.  Same thing for Jordi Savall (Viola da Gamba)'s teacher August Wenzinger, in truth that left out Josef Ulsamer.  In Martha's case nobody can nail down who is the native pioneer, an would get the false impression that their teacher's teacher's teachers are all from Europe.

Right now Joseph Iodone (lute) is already suffering from that fate, for he is not just the US pioneer, he taught virtually everyone's teacher's teacher's teachers here in the USA. People mostly forgotten about him, or thinks that lute playing from the USA came from the English (Bloch, Dolmetsh). Even students of students of students of him do not know of his existence. A non early music example will be, for years and years people assume Columbus was the one from the old world who first discover the Americas, we now know that is not the truth. Perhaps I can cut Martha's article massively so that it only stated that she was the American pioneer of the Viola da Gamba. There is of course, little need to mention her lute work so I can just wipe it out. In this case the article will be small, but at least it will clear things up. So let me clear most of them up.Alcatrazhack (talk) 20:33, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Massive Cut done. The discography list is under here: http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/performers/nypm.html Alcatrazhack (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/48 Cameras
hello _ i'm a member of the collective and i own the copyrights of the text. is there problem? thanks _ jean 91.180.247.238 (talk) 13:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * If you are the copyright owner and you wish to freely license the text, you would need to do so by filling out and sending in the form at WP:CONSENT.


 * However, even if that were done, the article draft stands no chance of being accepted in its current form, as it does not meet the requirements in WP:42. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Francois Houssemayne Du Boulay
I am not sure how much more one needs to do in terms of reffs?

(Hugenothistory (talk) 19:05, 31 March 2013 (UTC))


 * It would be a great help if you could use inline citations for your sources to clarify which source supports which of the draft's statements. See WP:Referencing for beginners for the technical details. Furthermore, James T Houssemayne Du Boulay seems to be a close relative and would have to be considered a primary source, not the kind of independent sources we're looking for. The Bank of England Archives also are a primary source. Huon (talk) 20:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)