User talk:Artiquities/Archive

New subject

This is a test message to Artiquities--Artiquities (talk) 15:32, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

There is discussion of your edits at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts#New_user. You are welcome to contribute to this so that any issues can be resolved. Ty 15:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

These need to be accurate. In Brilliant!, you've given a reference[1] for this sentence:

The exhibition sought to showcase a bourgeoning group of English artists now known as "Brit Artists" or Young British Artists.

However, there is no mention of "now known as "Brit Artists" or Young British Artists" in the reference. I have changed the position of the ref so that it refers to the first part of the sentence only.[2]

Re. references for inclusion of Henry Bond in Young British Artists,[3] see Talk:Young_British_Artists#Henry_Bond_-_need_quotation.

You might find WP:REFB useful. The section Wikipedia:REFB#Information_to_include shows how to format the reference.

As an alternative to simply deleting material on your talk page, you might consider the archiving option: WP:Archive. I have put an archive box at the top of this page, but feel free to delete it, if you don't want it.

Ty 19:03, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ty--I am not sure how to reply to you, just under original comment is the correct place I hope. Thank you for the information. I will leave the archive box--and thanks for that too. So much to learn.
--Artiquities (talk) 20:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Under the original is a good place, as it keeps it on record in the article talk page for future editors. I'm afraid there is a lot to learn! However, you are doing a good job already. Ty 21:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lacan at the Scene

I have merged the content to Henry Bond and left a redirect. My reasons are: a) I don't think the book merits a stand-alone article per Wikipedia:Notability (books) b) it is valid content in Henry Bond c) Henry Bond article is short and can accommodate the info, not needing WP:SUMMARY split d) it is more useful to readers to have all the info on Bond in one article. If you disagree, this can be discussed. Ty 21:26, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this makes sense--I appreciate your taking the time to clarify the rationale in this instance; and offer to discuss; all useful material to refer back to in the future.--Artiquities (talk) 22:25, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear, I think the decision to merge is a good one--Artiquities (talk) 22:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Alessandro Raho

Updated DYK query On March 15, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alessandro Raho, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jemima Stehli

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Jemima Stehli requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. TreacherousWays (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your article on Jemima Stehli is very short; not even a stub, really. Some information on her background, her work, and why she's notable would be helpful. TreacherousWays (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have done some more work on this page. I am confident that this page is now a reasonable stub.--Artiquities (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not the final arbiter of these things. In my mind, the article won't stand up to scrutiny without adding some more substantial information relating both to why she is noteworthy and more background on her and her work. The article might pass muster as a stub as it stands, but might not. The wikilink might provides suggestions for establishing notability. Good luck! TreacherousWays (talk) 18:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to say that it did stand up to scrutiny, as a stub. --Artiquities (talk) 09:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have fully formatted the refs,[4] and made some edits per policy: see the history.[5] Very good sources: that's how to get an article to stay! You can safely compose a new article in your user space first, if you want, in a sub page such as User:Artiquities/Draft 1 or place {{inuse}} at the top of the article in article space to deter predators. Ty 13:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for these suggestions. Yes, I probably went "live" too early with this and hence got patrolled.--Artiquities (talk) 15:24, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Stezaker

Great. Good to get an article on him. But please don't write articles out of quotes.[6] The information needs to be extracted and paraphrased. Quotes are copyright material and should be used sparingly, minimally, and only when it is necessary to have the original text, rather than the information embodied in the text. Ty 12:16, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Yes, I understand. I will use the work you have done on the article as a guide for the future. --Artiquities (talk) 13:30, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely comfortable with just using the one source, even paraphrased, as it still relates strongly to the original. Much better, even with a stub, to use at least two, preferably three sources, and interweave info from them. This also makes the article much safer to head off speedy delete notices. There are no shortages of sources for Stezaker![7] Ty 16:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non Free Files in your User Space

Hey there Artiquities, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some files that I found on User:Artiquities/Draft refs. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

  • See a log of files removed today here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

YBA

Please see Talk:Young_British_Artists#Creative_Camera. Ty 11:38, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Hirst-2007.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Hirst-2007.jpg. 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 permissions-en@wikimedia.org, 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 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 permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So why don't You link to the original image so that the license can be verified? feydey (talk) 09:41, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Go to the file's page File:Hirst-2007.jpg push the EDIT tab, write the file's source (with a wikilink) then save changes - it's like article editing. feydey (talk) 09:49, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes the image is now sourced. feydey (talk) 10:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quotation

Please stop quoting text needlessly as here.[8] I've pointed this out above. Quotes are copyright material and should be used only when essential to aid the goal of a free (as in copyleft) encyclopedia. Ty 11:23, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, extract, paraphrase, condense, I understand, I will work more in this direction from now.--Artiquities (talk) 11:32, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Morris

I agree with your analysis and have reverted to your version, which is a great improvement. I have left a message for 12431 (previously Parallax2008[9]), who is a SPA, only editing Sarah Morris and related. Likely WP:COI and can be reported at WP:COIN if problems of WP:OWN arise. Ty 01:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Liam Gillick

Curious deletions by an IP.[10] Material about YBA has been deleted in the past. I hope the article is on your watchlist... Ty 13:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those IP edits are a head scratcher. And the YBA template removed too ... I am watching, if I had got to it I would have presumed to rvv --Artiquities (talk) 16:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And Sarah Morris.[11] Ty 17:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is 12431, the SPA. Probably need to warn again. Which link do you advise for please don't remove referenced material from wikipedia? These articles both require material to be added—fairly copiously—not blanking and removing without purpose offered in edit summary--Artiquities (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I made up my own message and left it.[12] Otherwise have a look at WP:WARN (hours of fun!). Ty 22:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, your warning is similar to "subst:uw-delete3" which allows for two further levels of escalation before block--Artiquities (talk) 08:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The stages are normally followed to give editors a chance to reform, but can be skipped if something needs to be addressed more quickly. Ty 23:14, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
For fine contributions from a new editor to visual arts. Ty 23:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


You can keep this here (or delete it!) or put on your user page, as you choose. Ty 23:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will display it proudly. Any editors following my progress will also know well enough that the editor who has kindly bestowed has been diligent and tireless in offering guidance since my first edit as of Feb 10, 2010. --Artiquities (talk) 09:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bond author.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Bond author.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bond gillick documents.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Bond gillick documents.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:The past is a foreign country.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The past is a foreign country.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]