User talk:Springfieldohio

Hello, Springfieldohio! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! DuncanHill (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Referencing

Hi there, I noticed your contributions to Luther Alexander Gotwald. Please try and keep your writing to a neutral point of view and try and make it comprehensive. The trial seems to be an important part of this man's life, and as such information on the trial needs to be included to make the article comprehensive. All content needs to be verifiable so we need references to sentences. This means adding the external links within refernence tags. Citation templates can be used for this. Please do not introduce external links within the article text itself. If you have any questions, then please reply on my talkpage. Regards. Woody (talk) 20:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Heads up

Your question has been answered at Wikipedia:Help desk#Adding photos to my article. -IcĕwedgЁ (ťalķ) 19:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem with Image:Ferncliff -- King Mansion Side 5-20-07.jpg is...

You need to release the image under a free license. Read my summary of these here: User:Megapixie/CopyrightFlowChart/ImageAnyLicense. Add one of tags (like {{GFDL-self}} to the image description page. Megapixie (talk) 04:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:King, Col, David 4-20-07.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:King, Col, David 4-20-07.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. § Lights talk 19:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:King, Sara Jane.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:King, Sara Jane.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)^(Talk) 17:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Ort, Samuel Pres Close.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Ort, Samuel Pres Close.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 01:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Springfieldohio (talk) 13:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC) I wanted to add a photo of a very public monument in a very public park, where anyone can go and take a photo of it. However, that park is a long way from where I live. I e-mailed the local historical society and asked them to e-mail a photo of that monument to me. I gave them a link to my article. They did e-mail me that photo and made a lot of commentary about the article itself. I e-mailed them back, thanked them for their comments on the article and told them I was going to add the photo to my article. I revised the article in rsponse to their comments. However, when I uploaded the photo and inserted it in the article, the photo just vanished overnight. I cannot even find in the History who removed it or when it was removed. I used as the my copyright information that it was being used with the permission of the owner, which it was. Why was that photo removed? Who removed it? What is the correct copyright designation for it to stay? Why wasn't I given a chance to defend its propriety?

Hi, what was the image you are having problems with? Was it Image:Brady, John Mounument3.JPG? DuncanHill (talk) 13:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Springfieldohio (talk) 13:41, 1 August 2008 (UTC) Yes

As far as I can see from your contributions, after you uploaded it you didn't actually insert it into any article. The image is still on Wikipedia, so if you want to include it in an article you can. DuncanHill (talk) 13:46, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Springfieldohio (talk) 14:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC) Thank you very much. I did try to reinsert the photo after it disappeared, and it did not reappear. However, after learning from you that it was still there, I tried again and this time it showed up. It was obviously something I did wrong in saving its insertion and then trying to get it to show up again when I discovered its absence. Again thank you for your very helpful advice. Unfortunately, as I am sure you know all too well, learning all the subtlties of doing this takes a while and is learned on the back of many, many mistakes.

I'm glad I was of help - you are quite right of course, learning how Wikipedia works takes a long time! DuncanHill (talk) 14:23, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Question about deleted image

69.210.208.233 (talk) 18:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC) This time there is a note in the history of the article that my image was, in fact, deleted. It says I was given 48 hours notice, but I do not see where I got that notice. Anyway, I have been interested in the subject of my article for a long time. So, a long time ago I downloaded an image of a plague to him that is on display in a public park. Unfortunately, I no longer remember where I found that image. I have had it for years. I recently went to that public park and took a lot of photos (two of which I used as photos I had taken myself, which I did), but I did not take a photo of that plaque, because I already had one. Since this plaque is on dispay in a public place, is there any aceptable justification whereby I can upload it again and insert it into my article? If so, what is it? It would make a nice addition to the article, if there is some way I can use it.

Springfieldohio (talk) 19:37, 2 August 2008 (UTC) This time there is a note in the history of the article that my image was, in fact, deleted. It says I was given 48 hours notice, but I do not see where I got that notice. Anyway, I have been interested in the subject of my article for a long time. So, a long time ago I downloaded an image of a plague to him that is on display in a public park. Unfortunately, I no longer remember where I found that image. I have had it for years. I recently went to that public park and took a lot of photos (two of which I used as photos I had taken myself, which I did), but I did not take a photo of that plaque, because I already had one. Since this plaque is on dispay in a public place, is there any aceptable justification whereby I can upload it again and insert it into my article? If so, what is it? It would make a nice addition to the article, if there is some way I can use it.

Hi again, if you mean Image:Brady's plaque.jpg, I can't see where you were given warning either! I think the best thing to do is to ask at [[ Wikipedia:Media copyright questions where there are volunteers who specialize in this kind of question. DuncanHill (talk) 07:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Springfieldohio (talk) 12:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC) Thanks. I did that. They list "fair use" as a justification, but it never seems to be acceptable when I try to use it. It will interesting to see what they say.

Springfieldohio (talk) 17:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC) There is a note on this article that says it relies on a "self published source." The article has two references to the writings of Belle Swope, who wrote a lot about this church in 1905. I am not a member of this church. I have never been in this church. I do not even live anywhere close to this church. I do not cite any source I wrote. The article says nothing about its present day activities, other than the fact that it is still there. I did make a link to the church's web site, but that web site was not my primary source of information about it. The Belle Swope historical books were. My principal interest in this church is that it was attended by historical figures Major John Brady, Captain Samuel Brady and Major General Hugh Brady. Further, the parents of John Brady and the grandparents of Samuel and Hugh Brady are buried in the cemetery there. The church has its own historical signficance, because its 1736 founding makes it one of the oldest churches in central Pennsylvania. There are only two substantive references, because it is a short article.

What do I have to do to get that "self published" note off of this article?

DYK

On 27 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article David Ward King, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Well done! You don't often find a newbie landing a dyk! Americasroof (talk) 10:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to David Ward King has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Miquonranger03 (talk) 18:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:King, Mary Wylie Widow 1920.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:King, Mary Wylie Widow 1920.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 14:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I added the source as being my personal family photo album. I own the photo. I released it to the public domain. Does that solve the problem? This is a 1920 photo. The lady in the photo died in 1945, more than 50 years ago. Does that solve the problem?

Springfieldohio (talk) 15:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Copy and paste the license you have at Image:David Ward King c.1915.jpg. They get picky if there's any leeway. Americasroof (talk) 15:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Done. Does that solve the problem?

Springfieldohio (talk) 15:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

That should do it. They get nervous if there's no license template. Americasroof (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

The licensing has changed a little. I'm not quite sure how to cover it. They are asking specifically who took the photo (it used to be simply if it was published before 1920. All of your photos may run into trouble). You might ask the help desk. Americasroof (talk) 15:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I put the published before license. See if that works. They get picky now that it's been flagged. That would probably be a better license to upload your photos.Americasroof (talk) 15:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I very much appreciate your help.

Springfieldohio (talk) 16:14, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:HORTON.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:HORTON.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Audemus Defendere (talk) 08:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Please see my note on the PUI page - I tagged this so someone more hostile to its use wouldn't. I hope to get good info back from the UMKC site. In the meantime, you obviously have several books on the topic. If you can find copyright info from them on the photo (if it's used in them), and contribute that info to the PUI entry, that would be useful. Also, if you can cite us to other books or websites using the pic, there could be a case made for abandonment into the public domain. And don't worry, with the note I put on there, it won't likely be deleted anytime soon, at least not until I update with a reply from UMKC. Also, as to the possiblity of fair use, it might help if you can detail reasons there are no other pictures out there. Do you know of one taken or published before 1923? Audemus Defendere (talk) 09:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)