User talk:Landschaftsmaler

This is Landschaftsmaler's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (June 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ringbang was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Landschaftsmaler/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Ringbang (talk) 17:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Landschaftsmaler, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Ringbang (talk) 17:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Landschaftsmaler, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! --David Biddulph (talk) 07:33, 21 June 2016 (UTC) Thanks David. I´ll continue working on my article as I have received several comments by helpful members.--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 08:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Landschaftsmaler. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Intelligentsium 16:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Article submission

Hi Landschaftsmaler

If you want to get your article accepted you need to add properly formatted citations, with a url if possible, that actually reference the text. It is better to start from reliable sources and write the article rather than writing stuff then trying to find sources for it. We only include what has reliable sources.Charles (talk) 21:20, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles,

I have got newspaper cuttings for my references which I have cited in the text using the reference format. Was that wrong? There are url links for some of them but many of the newspaper cuttings are 20 years old and therefore would not have appeared on the web. What can I do?--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 05:12, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is fine to use offline sources if they are correctly formatted. See WP:Citing sources.Charles (talk) 08:41, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Charles. I can´t see anything wrong with the format of my references. So is it alright to resubmit the article?--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 08:54, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Charles Harris has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Charles Harris. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 14:10, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Charles Harris (painter) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Charles Harris (painter). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 16:44, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Charles Harris (painter) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Charles Harris (painter). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 13:19, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Charles Harris (painter) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Charles Harris (painter). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 17:37, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charles Harris (painter) has been accepted

Charles Harris (painter), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Jasonanaggie (talk) 16:13, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphans

Hi Landschaftsmaler. I saw the post you made at User talk:Yobot#Charles Harris. Just for reference, Yobot is a WP:BOT which has been programmed by Magioladitis to continuously check Wikipedia for articles which have certain problems, Magioladitis probably set it up to perform certain actions when it comes across a problem article, since bots are pretty good at doing simple syntax/formatting fixes and things like that. Certain issues, like de-orphaning an article, are a bit too complicated for a bot to do on its own, so it adds a template instead to let others know about the problem. These templates add the "problem" article to a maintenance page/category (i.e., lists of articles with the same problem such as Category:Orphaned articles) which can be used for reference by editors who like to fix these types of problems. De-orphaning is a bit involved and involves some judgment, so the bots leave it to us humans to figure out.

An orphaned article is basically one which has no incoming links (e.g., links to the target article found within other Wikipedia articles). On the left side of your screen you should see a sidebar. In there you'll find "What links here" under "Tools". If you click on that, you see a listing of all the articles/pages which link to your user talk page. Now, if you do that for Charles Harris (painter), you see that there are no incoming links from other articles (as explained in WP:O#Criteria), so it is an orphan. Orphan does not mean an article is in danger of being deleted, but interlinking between related articles is pretty helpful to readers since they can jump from one article to another with a single click to find out more information about something if they want. That's why you typically see many blue links in articles.

Anyone can de-orphan an article. You just need to find a relevant article and add a wikilink to it for Charles Harris. Contextual relevance and verifiability is important, so you made need to add a supporting citation as well as which shows the connection between Harris and the other article. For example, adding his name to List of cultural icons of England will solve the orphan problem, but your edit will also almost surely (perhaps quite quickly) be reverted by another editor for obvious reasons. Adding his name to Charles Harris is probably something which should be done so be bold and do it, but this is a disambiguation page and it does not count when it comes to de-orphaning. List of British painters might be a good way to de-orphan the article. Another way would be to find out where Harris was born (supported by a reliable source of course), add that information to the article about him, and then see if there's a Wikipedia article about that place. Articles about cities and towns, etc. often have sections in them titled "Notable residents", etc. Same goes for the schools he attended since school articles often have sections in them titled "Notable alumni", etc.

Only one incoming link is needed to de-orphan an article, but the more links to the article you can add to other articles the better, as long as they are relevant. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:07, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons

Hi Landschaftsmaler. There is a problem with the files you've uploaded to Commons. Commons only accepts files which are unequivocally freely licensed or in the public domain. This is because Commons' licensing allows any file uploaded to it to be download by anyone anywhere in the world for any purpose, including commercial use. Since you did not create these works yourself, you cannot freely license them without the explicit permission of the file's copyright holder. This permission needs to be in writing as explained in c:COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder and sent by email to Commons or clearly posted somewhere online with the image so that it can verified by OTRS volunteers. Files whose licensing cannot be verified will be deleted per c:COM:PCP. Verbal permission is not acceptable because it can't be verified. You should go to your Commons user talk page and follow the instructions I left there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:56, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MarchJuly, Thanks for your help. Permissions will be sent asap. --Landschaftsmaler (talk) 13:08, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please make sure the copyright holder understands what a free license means when it comes to Commons. They basically have to agree to give permission to everyone in the world to use the image for any purpose and it cannot be revoked once they give it per c:COM:Revoke. It's best to use the form at c:COM:OTRS#E-mail template for release of rights to a file since that's Commons' preferred form. If by chance the file is deleted before an email is sent, then still send the email anyway. OTRS will reply and provide you with a ticket number, you can then use this number to ask for the file to be undeleted as explained in c:Commons:Undeletion requests. You do not need to reupload the file. If you send the email and the image still has not been deleted, then add the template c:Template:OTRS pending to the file as explained in c:COM:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?. This will let Commons administrators know to wait on deleting the file until the permissions email you sent can be verified. If you're stuck and not sure what to do or what an update on your email's status, you can ask for assistance at c:COM:OTRSN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Landschaftsmaler. I saw you uploaded another image to Commons without being able to verify proper permission to do so. Just for reference, it is almost always the photographer who is considered to be the copyright holder of a photo. The subject of a photo or the person who has the photo (or a copy) in their possission may "own" the that particular "object" per se, but the copyright holder and creator is still typically the photographer; thus, freely licensing the photographer's work requires their explicit written permission to do so. Sometimes in a work-for-hire, part of the agreement between photographer and subject involves a transfer of copyright ownership; this, however, also needs to be verifiable either through a written declaration of consent or something posted online. It might be a good idea to refrain from uploading any more files until the licensing of the ones you've uploaded to date gets sorted. Commons and Wikimedia are both part of the Wikimedia Foundation and there are lots of similarities and overlap between the two, but its best to treat as completely different entities with their own specific rules and guidelines because they serve different purposes. Commons administrators primary role is to ensure that no harm comes to the project due to inappropriate file uploads, so they will block account which they feel show a pattern of such behavior, even if there is no intent to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have since sent the requested authorisation on behalf of the photographer to the specified Wiki commons address. If it is required that the photographer should send that note personally, I will ask him to do so. --Landschaftsmaler (talk) 04:57, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe all that matters is the OTRS get something which they can use to verify the licensing. So, whatever you sent should be OK as long as it's in the proper format. OTRS should contact you if they need something more or different. Now, all you need to do is replace the c:Template:No permission since template(s) I added with c:Template:OTRS pending on the relevant file page(s). -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:28, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MarchJuly, I´ll do that. You are most helpful as usual.--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 05:34, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've added "OTRS pending" templates to two of the files. OTRS gets a bit busy sometimes so there can be a bit of a wait, but the files should be OK for the time being, unless someone notices something else wrong with them that needs immediate attention. Not saying that's the case here, just trying to pointing out that different editors sometimes notice different things. Anyway, if OTRS verification takes 30 days of more, the template will automatically switch to c:Template:No permission since. So, if a couple weeks pass and you hear nothing, then you should ask about the files at c:COM:OTRSN. You should get (have gotten) a reply to your emails from OTRS which contains an OTRS ticket number. Knowing this number will make it easier for an OTRS volunteer to track down your email(s), so save it somewhere for future reference.

One last thing about image files, licensing is very important for obvious reasons, but the actual use/formatting of image files needs to done in accordance with WP:IUP; in addition, like textual content, a consensus may sometimes need to be achieved regarding the use of a particular image in a particular article. Images added by one editor are sometimes removed by other editors for various reasons, including contextual relevance. Again, not saying that's the case here, but if an image you add is removed by another editor and it's obviously not a case of vandalism, you should try and discuss things on the article talk page per WP:BRD in the same way you would discuss the removal of textual content. --

Thanks MarchJuly, I´ll bear that in mind.--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 05:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]