User talk:JeremyA/Archive14

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 24 August 2010 and 7 November 2010.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)

Thank you. Jeremy (talk) 02:16, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

• Previous archive page: User talk:JeremyA/Archive13.
• Next archive page: User talk:JeremyA/Archive15.

---

Changes to Goodman Theatre page

I am having difficulty changing the Goodman Theatre page, all of the references were correct and the information has been verified by Goodman, I would like to know why this is being continuously denied. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodmanintern (talk • contribs) 19:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Changes to Goodman Theatre page

I am an intern at Goodman Theatre, I was assigned to change our Wikipedia page for publicity needs, these changes which I tried to make have been verified by Goodman's publicity office. Can I use a different reference other than Goodman's webpage because this information is available at other sources? This seems to be overly complicated, Goodman Theatre would like to update our page and would like to do so easily, quickly, and with Wikipedia's approval. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodmanintern (talk • contribs) 16:32, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

du Sable

Thank you. Shsilver (talk) 13:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

My best suggestion for finding information on the African-American community and the push to have him recognized would either be the Tribune Archives or the duSable Museum. As a side note, I think you've been a little heavy handed in editing. For instance, I'm positive his wife's name was Kittihawa[1] (an Indian name as she was an Indian). I would imagine that she took the Christian name "Catherine" at some point when she either married duSable or converted to Christianity. Unfortunately, I'm swamped right now and can't spend the time necessary to find the appropriate references.Shsilver (talk) 04:02, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Sheffield

Hi, sorry to bother you, but I know you did a lot of work on the Sheffield article and wondered if you could cast your eyes over the significant changes been made to it at the moment. I prompted the user about bare URLs and alt text for images, which they appear to have taken note of. It really needs someone who knows the place and what was done to get it to GA standard to see how constructive all of the other edits are. I may be worrying too much and everything may be fine. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 14:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the message - I know what you mean. Keith D (talk) 09:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Map of Chicago 1830

I was wondering if you would care to express your opinion on whether Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Map of Chicago 1830 should be promoted. You have commented, but have not expressed an opinion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I should clarify that it has 3 supports and 4 are required to pass.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

If you think we should be considering a different version, feel free to upload it. In terms of encyclopedic value, a clearer version is better, IMO. Feel free to comment at the discussion. I am unable to see page 18 online however.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2010

Delivered September 2010 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 06:50, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Thompson Chicago plat 1830

Please comment at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Thompson Chicago plat 1830. There are some issues that you can address better than I.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:01, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know who to report this to

Um, hi, I'm not sure where to report this, I saw you were the last person to edit the Jean duSable article before the edit I want to report, so I come to you. After a date change you made to that article, someone made a larger change that was done apparently to make the article fit into a ghost story, they added that duSable died drowned in the Missouri river, when there was no mention of that before and the citation they added is to a page with scrambled text that's actually supposed to be a clue for those reading the ghost story. I didn't want to reverse that edit myself since I have never edited a single article in Wikipedia and I'm sure that there will be some drama after this one. So, you know, just letting somebody know that the article about Jean DuSable is being used for a game. Thank you. (189.231.85.78 (talk) 23:02, 9 September 2010 (UTC))

Your GA nomination of Kinzie Street railroad bridge

The article Kinzie Street railroad bridge you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kinzie Street railroad bridge for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Pyrotec (talk) 08:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

FIle:Gatecrasher Fire 20070618.jpg

You removed the {{di-no permission}} tag from the image with the question "Is there any reason not to assume that the uploader is also the copyright holder?". My reply, as was stated in the {{di-no permission}} tag, is that the license on the Flickr source page shows the image licensed as "© All Rights Reserved", which does not match the {{PD-self}} license on the Wikipedia image page. In this case it is not the issue of who the copyright holder is but obtaining an OTRS from the photographer, or having them change the license on the source page. If you look at the Editors talk page that is pretty much what the message says there as well. If want to revert your edit you can, or I can do it for you. Let me know. Thanks. Soundvisions1 (talk) 14:30, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

If we assume good faith on the part of the uploader of this file, there is no reason to dispute the license that he used. The editor uploaded a low resolution version of this file, which he released into the public domain, he then added a link to a higher resolution version of the file on his flickr page that he has not released into the public domain. Whilst I would prefer that he had allowed us to use the higher resolution version under a free license, there is nothing to stop the copyright holder of a photograph from using different licenses for different versions of the photo. I see no reason to believe that the uploader of this image is not, as he claims, the copyright holder, and therefore no need to require OTRS or to delete the file. The editor has not made any edits since 2007, and so is unlikely to respond to messages on his talk page—if you want further clarification from him I suggest that you try to contact him through his flickr account. —Jeremy (talk) 17:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

It is all fine and well to assume good faith but, because I deal with this sort of thing in the real world along with doing it here over the last several years, when it comes to copyright and license/permission I want to get everything in order. In this case 'assume good faith' has nothing to do with it, the legal side of this does. We have the same image (Resolution really doesn't matter as it is the exact same image. If this were a derivative work it would be different) that has two different licenses, it needs to be verified. You can use File:Antonin Scalia 2010.jpg as somewhat of an example - this image has a license on it's source that also matches what is listed at Wikimedia Commons. From what I can see all of the Stephen Maskers' other images at Flickr are "all rights reserved." It takes only a few moments to change what terms show on Flickr, as does it to send off an email to OTRS. As a photographer myself I would would much rather see the OTRS be a required step, as well as make using the template found in the Mini how-to required as well. Wikipedia has come a long way in the last three year to be sure - when I started editing here many images where an uploader claimed a Copyright were deleted on site, or within 24 hours, because so many admins felt copyright was equal to being non free, thusly against the mission of Wikipedia. You are welcome to contact the uploader, I think that would be a good idea if you feel they may not come here. In any case - I am taking it you are not going to revert your removal of the di tag? Soundvisions1 (talk) 17:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

It is actually extremely common for different resolutions of the same image to have different licenses. As an example, the photos of mine that are sold through Getty images have a very low price tag if Getty's customers wish to purchase a license to use just a thumbnail sized version, but a much higher price tag if they want to license the full-sized version. It is our standard practice to believe that the person claiming to be the copyright holder of material that they submit to Wikipedia (be that article text, images, or other media files) is telling the truth unless there is good reason to suspect otherwise. In this case there is no good reason to suspect otherwise, and I see no reason to undo my edit. —Jeremy (talk) 19:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)You are missing the point. You keep saying "assume good faith" and tagging on that the uploader "is telling the truth unless there is good reason to suspect otherwise". This has zero to do with "telling the truth". I have not said to the uploader at anytime "You are a liar, you stole this non-free image!" What I said was simple - extremely simple - Wikipedia version PD. Source version not PD. For legal reasons that does not line up. Remember you are not talking about a photo or press agency that offers different resolutions based on usage rights, you are talking about Wikipedia where higher quality versions of free images are uploaded all the time to replace lower quality versions. By law you can't relinquish all copyright claims on something and than tell someone they may not use a better version of it. It doesn't matter if it is a motion picture, a book, a painting or an image. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this case. My concerns are 1. protect the Wikimedia foundation from something like the Virgin Mobil case or the Adam Curry case and 2. to be clear beyond any doubt that the photographer means for his image to be in placed into the public domain - in others words it is no longer under copyright protection. There is a possibility that they simply chose public domain because it met the Wikipedia requirements. In looking more into this I can take an educated guess that might have been the case because of a message on their talk page that says "its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted." And it *was* deleted via a Deltion discussion in June 2010 for what we are discussing right now. What happened between June 26, 2010 when it was deleted and July 18, 2010 when it was restored and moved it to its new location? I can not find any discussion where it was decided to restore the image and move it/rename it. I am even more perplexed because it appears to be you who did that. Do you a close connection to the photographer or the image? Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I have sent the following message to the owner of the flickr account: "Hi. I am an administrator on the Wikipedia website. Back in June of 2007 someone claiming to be you uploaded a photograph of the fire at the Gatecrasher nightclub to Wikipedia. You can see the photo here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gatecrasher_Fire_20070618.jpg Recently another Wikipedia editor has raised a question regarding your photo—when it was uploaded to Wikipedia it was marked as being released into the public domain, however a link was added to your flickr photostream where the same photo is marked as being 'all rights reserved'. If it was not you that uploaded this photo to Wikipedia then I will happily delete it from the site. However, if it was you can you please confirm that it was your intention to release this photo into the public domain so that we can continue to use it as a valuable illustration in our articles on Gatecrasher."—Jeremy (talk) 19:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

There was no deletion discussion. One editor marked it as a possible copyright violation and an admin deleted it. I disagreed with that admins decision and reversed it. I completely dispute your assertion that the copyright holder cannot license different resolutions of an image with different licenses—please point to the legal precedent for your assertion. —Jeremy (talk) 20:28, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, there *was* a deletion discussion - Possibly Unfree Files - June 12 2010 - File:565550322_3b22daca44.jpg. It was not deleted because it was tagged as a copyvio. The nom was for the exact same reasons as are being discussed now. And it closed on June 26, 2010. Not only was it "listed for 14 days" as required, it was listed for over 20 days. The deletion discussion was closed properly. The proper way to "disagree" would have been at Wikipedia:Deletion review, not taking matters into your own hands because you "disagreed with that admins decision and reversed it" 3 weeks later - that seems out of process.

And as for a "Case law" regarding public domain - that is not needed if one understands what copyright is, what PD is and what a derivative work is as it relates to PD. Starting with the U.S. Copyright Offices copyright FAQ: Q: Where is the public domain? A: The public domain is not a place. A work of authorship is in the “public domain” if it is no longer under copyright protection or if it failed to meet the requirements for copyright protection. Works in the public domain may be used freely without the permission of the former copyright owner. Also one can read Appendix II. Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988 - Title 17, United States Code, as amended by this Act, does not provide copyright protection for any work that is in the public domain in the United States. On Wikipedia one can read Copyright FAQ - Public Domain - A work which is not copyrighted is in the public domain, and may be freely copied by anyone. In short if this image is really in Public Domain than it is impossible to have another exact image that exists being under copyright. However Taking a work in the public domain and modifying it in a significant way creates a new copyright on the work. Sadly the larger image is *not* different enough to constitute any sort of copyrightable derivative work.

If you still cannot understand let me try two different scenarios.

• 1. I make a motion picture of exactly 90 minutes in length. It is unnamed and I release it into Public Domain. Now I take the exact same motion picture and place some titles into it, naming it "Here comes trouble" - the motion picture now runs 93 minutes and I claim this version is "all rights reserved". It won't be a valid copyright because it is not significantly different from the version in public domain.
• 2. There is an old dusty book sitting on a shelf that is in public domain. I take every word of the text and redo it verbatim - place it all on nice white paper. I create a new cover and I now tell people this version is all rights reserved. Again - it is not significantly different from the public domain source, I would not be able to obtain a copyright.

In the words of the US Copyright office, Circular 14.0510: To be copyrightable, a derivative work must differ sufficiently from the original to be regarded as a new work or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting work will not qualify a work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must be original and copyrightable in itself. Titles, short phrases, and formatting are not copyrightable. And, in specific regards to public domain: A work that has fallen into the public domain, that is, a work that is no longer protected by copyright, can be used for a derivative work, but the copyright in the derivative work will not restore the copyright of the public-domain material. Neither will it prevent anyone else from using the same public-domain work for another derivative work.

And if none of that works - consider this - the file being used on Wikipedia found at File:Gatecrasher_Fire_20070618.jpg being claimed as PD is exactly the same as this Flickr image that is Copyright All rights reserved by Jim Barter It is not a larger size, nor a smaller size - but the exact same size.

NOTE: As of September 15, 2010 the photographers source page now reflects a license of Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0, which is still not a license that Wikipedia allows. See Non-commercial only and By Permission Only Images to be deleted statement from May 19, 2005.

Soundvisions1 (talk) 02:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with just about everything you say above. However, it is academic now as the copyright holder replied to my message and volunteered to change the tagging on flickr. It is now tagged with a cc-by-sa license. —Jeremy (talk) 23:48, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem, you are not disagreeing with me, you are disagreeing with United State copyright law and the Wikipedia translation of that law. (Or maybe it is not about the law, perhaps you are disagreeing with Jimbos "Non-commercial only and By Permission Only Images to be deleted" directive or Wikipedias process for deletion discussions). However I thank you for contacting the photographer and having them change their license to a Wikipedia compatible one. Soundvisions1 (talk) 00:20, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

No, I am disagreeing with your interpretation of the law (which, although IANAL I am very familiar with).—Jeremy (talk) 01:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Swindon page - removal of swindonweb.com link

Hi Jeremy

It seems all links to www.swindonweb.com - incl. references to key historical content relating to Swindon - has been removed. Can you explain this. SwindonWe.com is a commercial site, yes, but was the first site dedicated to Swindon (1997) and has a won a number of genuine awards for its content since. Now over half a million pages focused entirely on Swindon it is surely relevant to wikipedia? Links to radio stations etc. are still included are are surely not as relevant. Many thanks. Christina 78.32.133.210 (talk) 18:39, 25 September 2010 (UTC).

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Lakewood Balmoral Historic District 090315.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Lakewood Balmoral Historic District 090315.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Makeemlighter (talk) 07:46, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

• Oh, this was automatic through Twinkle. Nothing to worry about. Just removing the VPC tag. Sorry to bug you. Makeemlighter (talk) 07:47, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - October 2010

Delivered October 2010 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 00:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Amit Puntambekar Page

Maybe I should of linked him to the Viva Kerala FC page which he played 3 professional games for, 0 goals. http://www.vivakerala.net/viva/ can be used as a source —Preceding unsigned comment added by Punty1992A (talk • contribs) 18:16, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Your image is now a Valued Picture

An image created by you has been promoted to valued picture status Your image, File:Michigan Ave Bridge 060415.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Spongie555 (talk) 03:41, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

You have mail

You have mail --Jeremyb (talk) 08:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

adding sources

Help? I'd love your help, please. I can't figure out how to add sources (resources) - I had books, news articles, reviews, websites, radio interviews I could use as sources, but don't know how to put them in. would so appreciate your help. Also, have never been able to or known how to add photos to either my own site or others. I was finally successful at adding a photo to the page for Kate Millet. But can't remember how! thanks so much.Linda Wolf (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Linda Wolf - fixing my wiki page

Hi Jeremy,

thank you so much for writing me. I have spent the day today listing all my sources. At least what I can find online. My sources come from as far back as before the Internet (can you believe there ever was a before the Internet)

I'll do my best to have someone who understand how to do all this, do it for me.

I sure hope the site won't come down. I have more sources and resources than a person needs!

PS Jeremy, once we add the citations and sources, can we erase the tag about them? Or does someone else such as you need to do it? Once again thanks so much. linda wolf www.lindawolf.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda Wolf (talk • contribs) 15:51, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

warmly, linda —Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda Wolf (talk • contribs) 21:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Mich Ave Bridge

message left at my talk.Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

additional message left. Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:29, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Message left at Michigan Avenue Bridge discussion page.

thank you

Jeremy,

My husband is has been through grad school and knows how to rewrite the piece so it has the correct grammar. We won't add anything new, just fix up the structure and add sources. Then, I'll let you know when it is done and thank you for taking the tags out at that time. If you have any suggestions after that, we'll be glad to follow them. You've been really great to work with. Thank you. And thanks for keeping wikipedia a reliable source. I use it all the time for research. I hope it continues to be upheld with such diligence. Warmly, linda —Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda Wolf (talk • contribs) 15:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Wolf Point, Chicago/GA1

I think I was harshly reviewed at Talk:Wolf Point, Chicago/GA1. However, if there is sourced content for the evolution of the area that would surely improve the article. Do you know what the structures were surrounding the point in your bird's eye view image? Do you have any other content to add? P.S. Congrats on the Michigan Avenue Bridge!--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, do you have anything to say about the West Bank of Wolf Point today?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:49, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

This was one I had really hoped would be on my WP:CUP GA mantle. If you can help me spruce it up and know anyone who might want to review it before the end of the month, that would be great. Basically, I think it is a must to explain the area at the time of the photo. Then, confirming it had been burnt in the great fire would be key. After that I guess just showing how it evolved from the picture to 350 West Mart Center and a parking lot would be good if we can do it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I have renominated it. You may want to watch Talk:Wolf Point, Chicago/GA2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

The current GAC queue is about 2 months so there is probably time for you to do the kinds of things you are thinking about.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like I spoke too soon. I will look at some of these comments tomorrow. Maybe with all your intended changes, this might have a shot at FAC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:34, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

It was pretty quick, but that was not so uncommon a few years ago.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:08, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Wolf_Point,_Chicago#Railroad_tracks.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Linda Wolf - added resources as requested

Hello Jeremy,

Well, we did it! Thank you for taking a look at the page now and hopefully we fixed the errors adding resources that are certainly verifiable -- hopefully also, you can remove the tags that look so stunningly like I'm making up my life story! Warmly, linda wolf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda Wolf (talk • contribs) 05:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

PS Jeremy, I see that the resources list still contains weblinks that perhaps should go into another place or not at all. Also, could you please add this where it is approprite... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_photography —Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda Wolf (talk • contribs) 13:48, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I commend you on your editorial contributions. Please post these on your user page.

This user helped promote Kinzie Street railroad bridge to good article status.

This user helped promote Michigan Avenue Bridge to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Linda Wolf

Jeremy, I left you messages on my own my talk page and here. Hopefully you will receive them. Eric, the man who worked on the site to put in the resources, didn't add new text, but fixed the grammar, as requested. He also discovered that I'm listed on a page called notable female photographers on wikipedia. I wonder if that would be good to add to the categories at the bottom? I hope this resolves all the problems. I will refrain from ever adding information here, but let others do it in the future. Thanks again for all your help. Warmly, linda wolf.

Linda Wolf

Jeremy, I left you messages on my own my talk page and here. Hopefully you will receive them. Eric, the man who worked on the site to put in the resources, didn't add new text, but fixed the grammar, as requested. He also discovered that I'm listed on a page called notable female photographers on wikipedia. I wonder if that would be good to add to the categories at the bottom? I hope this resolves all the problems. I will refrain from ever adding information here, but let others do it in the future. Thanks again for all your help. Warmly, linda wolf. Linda Wolf (talk) 14:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC) october 22nd 2010

OY VEY!

Hello Jeremy, I haven't heard from you so perhaps you on out of town or don't check this much. Well, shoot, we put in about 15 verifiable resources from newspapers including the Seattle Times, which one can still find online, and something or someone took them out and left us with 5. Plus the tags are still up. I honestly don't get it. I sense there are mechanical trawlers out there in wikipedialand that might not read the things they delete. Anyway, Jeremy, I feel you are my only resource for help on what's next? what shall we do to meet the standards of wikipedia. Shall I just leave it be and forget all the other citations? It doesn't even show me in my history that I ever put them up. I thought you said it was ok for me to add them myself. Oy Vey. Your help, suggestions would be very much appreciated. I leave for Mexico in a week and will be gone for 3 weeks. warm wishes, linda Linda Wolf (talk) 15:46, 23 October 2010 (UTC) october 23 2010

PS to above

Here is what we put up on my site as of a few days ago. It is what we did to address the issues about resources and grammar. I put it online, as you suggested, but my site was reverted to the old one since then and there is no history showing that this was put online... I am going to try again to put it online - perhaps you can check up on it. I am perplexed. thanks, linda

Linda Wolf, (March 17, 1950-) is an American-born photographer and writer, and founder of the nonprofit organization The Teen Talking Circles Project (originally the Daughters-Sisters Project). She is the daughter of poet Barbara Wolf and 1940's cinematographer Joe Wolf. Her photographs are housed in museums, libraries, and private collections internationally, including the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, France; Le Zilvermuseum Het Sterckshof, Belgium; Le Musee Reatu, Arles, France; Le Musee Cantini, Marseille, France; and the Photographic Center of the Tokyo Fuji Art Museum, Tokyo, Japan.

Wolf began her photography career as a teenager working with Fanny , one of the first all-girl rock bands to be signed by a major label, and became an official photographer for the Joe Cocker Mad Dogs and Englishmen Tour (1970) . From 1970-1975, she lived and studied in Provence, France, attending the Institute of American Universities, and L'Ecole Experimental Photographic . Her early photographic work in France focused on people and village life in the Vaucluse Mountains. Upon returning to the US, Wolf taught photography through the University of California at Los Angeles Extension, worked as a staff photographer for the Los Angeles Citywide Mural Project, and became a founding member of the organization Women in Photography International[4]

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Wolf created a public art project of bus bench murals consisting of photos of ordinary people sitting on bus benches. The photographs were placed on the sides of buses and the back of bus benches in Los Angeles, San Diego, and Oakland, CA, and Arles, France. The benches were conceived as a response to the dehumanizing effects of advertising, , , and were exhibited in numerous venues including the Los Angeles Municipal Art Gallery and the Rencontres Internationales de la Photographie International Festival of Photography in Arles, France . She then developed the project, "L.A. Welcomes the World", a series of large-scale multicultural portraits of people presented on billboards throughout Los Angeles, for the 1984 Summer Olympics .

In 1984, she was chosen as one of one hundred international photographers to participate in the book project, “24 Hours in the Life of Los Angeles,” and was the featured guest on an episode of the KNBC/PBS series, “Talk About Pictures.”

Wolf went on to co-author three books also featuring her photography: Daughters of the Moon, Sisters of the Sun: Young Women and Mentors on the Transition to Womanhood [1] ; Global Uprising: Confronting the Tyrannies of the 21st Century--Stories from a New Generation of Activists [2] ; and Speaking and Listening From the Heart, The Art of Facilitating Teen Talking Circles. [3]

References:

1 http://www.lindawolf.net/about/about.htm
2 King, Pam. Benched! Photographer Linda Wolf Creates Public Art You Can Take Sitting Down, California Living, Los Angeles Herald Examiner, January 17, 1982, p. 17
3 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067275/fullcredits
4 Fabricius, Klaus, and Saunders, Red. 24 Hours in the Life of Los Angeles. Alfred Van Der Marck Editions, 1984, p. 271.
5 Linda Wolf: Faces in Time, Petersen’s Photographic Magazine, May, 1976, p. 62-70.

6 Muchnic, Suzanne, Moving to Back of Bus Bench, Los Angeles Times, July 6, 1979, p. IV-9

7 http://www.womeninphotography.org/historical/WIPIhistory2.html#wolf
8 Linda Wolf: Friends in Common, Petersen’s Photographic, June 1982, p 56.
9 Stavitsky, Gail. Art on the Streets, Artweek, December 13, 1980, p. 12.
10 Murray, Joan, Photography:Images in Transit, Artweek, December 13, 1980, p 1.

11 Apodaca, Patrice. A Celebration of Humanity, The Rangefinder, September, 1982, p 6. 12 Klein, Patricia, Who Is That on the Billboard Over There?, Los Angeles Herald Examiner, July 10, 1983 13 Fabricius, Klaus, and Saunders, Red, op. cit.

1 Wolf, Linda, and Hughes, K. Wind. Daughters of the Moon, Sisters of the Sun: Young Women and Mentors on the Transition to Womanhood. New Society Publishers, 1997. 2 Wolf, Linda, and Welton, Neva. Global Uprising: Confronting the Tyrannies of the 21st Century; Stories from a New Generation of Activists. New Society Publishers, 2001. 3 Wolf, Linda, and Welton, Neva. Speaking and Listening from the Heart. The Teen Talking Circle Project, 2005.

Linda Wolf (talk) 16:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC) October 23, 2010

Thank you Jeremy

I really appreciate your post to me. I'll be sure to never touch that page again. And I'll contact you if I need to discuss anything. I so appreciate you helping me out. I hope that others will take an interest in my work and add to the page as time goes by. It is much more heartwarming to read what others write than what I think of myself! I could write a book about teen girls and self-worth & self-respect -- oh yea, I already did!!! If you would like a copy of any of my books, please write me offline at lwp@lindawolf.net

Also, I don't know how my link box got erased, but the three links I had in it were the following. I don't know if you can add them, but would appreciate it. I know that a couple books are coming out next year about Leon Russell and Joe Cocker Tour.

www.lindawolf.net (official website) www.teentalkingcircles.org (Teen Talking Circles website) www.lindawolf.net/Joe (Joe Cocker, Mad Dogs and Englishmen Tour) warmly, linda wolf

Linda Wolf (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - November 2010

Delivered November 2010 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 12:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Book:Sheffield

User:Ironholds told me that you would have relevant feedback about Book:Sheffield, so I'm dropping you a line about it. Specifically, I'd like to know if there are any articles missing, or any articles that would be better left out of this book.

If you're not familiar with Wikipedia books, they are collections of article which can be downloaded electronically for free (in PDF or ODT formats, which can then be read offline, or printed by the user), or ordered in print. For examples, see Book:Hydrogen, Book:Canada, Book:Prostate, Book:Invincible class battlecruisers, (more can be found here). If you are still confused, I suggest clicking on "Download PDF" to see what exactly a book looks like when in PDF (ODT format is similar, printed books look better since they are printed on smaller pages, but the general idea is the same). The exact format of books can be varied: simpler books are just a bunch of links (Book:Invincible class battlecruisers), more complex books are usually structured in chapters such as Book:Hadronic Matter.

Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Dearborn Station 060409.jpg is now a Valued Picture

An image created by you has been promoted to valued picture status Your image, File:Dearborn Station 060409.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Acather96 (talk) 07:15, 7 November 2010 (UTC)