User talk:QueenPuck

Welcome!

Hello, QueenPuck!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path
		Do you have any idea how few new editors cite sources at all? Your scholarship is impressive, and you've created a lot of well-referenced, well-written new content. You have expanded articles from tiny stubs to substantive, useful resources (wikifarming). You might consider nominating some of them for Did you know?; any article that is less than a week old or has expanded fivefold (or more) in the past week is eligible. You could probably get Good Article Status for them fairly easily, too, given the quality you work at. Both of these would mean more contact and collaboration with other editors; if you don't want that, of course, you are quite free to avoid it. Wikipedia editing is a hobby, and there is startling variety in how people like to edit. Since you seem interested in biographies, the community on the talk page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography might be congenial and useful at need. You seem to be doing very well, but if you have any editing questions, feel free to post on my talk page→ HLHJ (talk) 00:48, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HLHJ

Thank you so much for your kind words! It was really encouraging to read this as I am still trying to build up my confidence and experience on here. I will have a look at your suggestions and, in the meantime, I have joined WikiProject Biography.

QueenPuck (talk) 17:54, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed a reverse Dunning-Kruger effect in new editors on Wikipedia; really good editors underestimate their own skills, and are sometimes conscientious even to the point of hesitating to edit at all. A friend of mine has been editing only things they are quite sure are factually inaccurate, and that with great fear and trepidation and endless rererechecking, for years; and frankly, every edit they might conceivably make would be an improvement. Perfectionism as the enemy of progress...

Feel free to completely ignore my suggestions, I'll not be in the least put out.

I don't know your tastes well enough to judge what you'd like to do very well, and I could never judge it as well as you can. Have fun, and know that your contributions are valued, and of high quality! HLHJ (talk) 01:37, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HLHJ

Wow, I must have a long lost twin out there because you could honestly be describing me when you talk about the fear and trepidation and the rechecking... good to know I am not alone! I too have been very cautious about the articles I choose to edit, only making major changes to articles which really need help according to the various tags at the top.

I do not yet think I am ready for the bright lights of the main page, but I will work towards it.

Thanks again :)

QueenPuck (talk) 15:17, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UK copyright claims on public-domain images

Hi again, QueenPuck! UK copyright law is sort of strange in allowing a person who copies a public-domain image to claim copyright in their copy (maybe). Wikipedia ignores this, as it would be insanely complicated to actually try and figure out who photographed or scanned every public-domain image and whether they did so in the UK. For more background, see National Portrait Gallery and Wikimedia Foundation copyright dispute. Please don't worry about this; it is not every editor's job to understand and reconcile international inconsistencies in copyright law. As a Wikipedia editor, when the Wikimedia Foundation defends its own policies, it implicitly defends you; in the very unlikely case that anyone complains, you can and should dump the whole issue on the WMF, and let them reply on your behalf.

Uploading images etc. to Wikimedia Commons instead of the English-language Wikipedia lets people speaking other languages find and use them more easily (and makes no difference to how you use them here). You can upload to Commons using Commons:Special:UploadWizard. If the license won't let it be uploaded to Commons, the wizard will tell you first thing, so it's generally worth trying Commons first. If you accidentally upload something to Wikipedia instead, there will be a tab at the top of ther file page which says "Export to Wikimedia Commons"; if you click on it another wizard will transfer it automatically.

Lots of wizards, welcome to Oz! HLHJ (talk) 02:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HLHJ

I was actually agonizing over whether to upload the images of Mary, Countess of Buccleuch and her husband, Walter, to the Commons or directly onto Wikipedia. The actual site whence I retrieved the image ([1]) said it can be used under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. I knew that, as the book in which the images appear was published in the late 1800s, the images are technically in the public domain, but I did worry about breaking a copyright rule by ignoring the licence provided by the site.

If I am understanding you correctly, I should change these images to "public domain" and export them to the Commons? Is there a limit to how many of these images I can upload to the Commons, as there are several wonderful depictions of various Scottish nobles that would certainly enhance their corresponding articles on Wikipedia.

Also, may I just ask for your advice in relation to another issue on here? There is a Wikipedia user who is clearly an employee (whether paid or unpaid) of the Musée des ondes Emile Berliner and has failed to declare it. They are making changes to numerous articles, with their only contribution being (often irrelevant and tangential) mentions of the museum; please see here. They have clearly been asked to promote the museum, but I know from reading posts on the Teahouse that that is actually prohibited on here. I thought about reaching out to them, but I feel, as a beginner, it is not really my place. Also, I would hate to make someone feel unwelcome, as they probably do not know that what they are doing is not appropriate. Do you have any advice as to how to proceed?

Thank you again; it is nice feeling like I have a mentor on here!

QueenPuck (talk) 16:28, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is certainly suitable to upload all of the images to Commons. There is no limit to how many images you can upload to Commmons; as long as they could, in theory, be useful for some sort of vaguely educational purpose, they are welcome. I've uploaded the better part of a thousand images to Commons. Endless stuff: SVG diagrams I drew myself, entire bookfulls of illustrations uploaded to illustrate facsimilies of the books on Wikisource, crops of existing Commons images (using CropTool, which is really useful; it means you neededn't download an image to crop it, and you can easily do a Jpeg crop without losing resolution). No-one has ever taken one down for being out-of-scope, and portrait images of historical figures certainly aren't out-of-scope.

Putting images under CC-BY gives you (and anyone else) permission to upload them all to Commons (though in this case, since they are indeed public domain, you could upload them all even if the site said that they were copyright and absolutely not to be copied anywhere). Any public-domain image may be uploaded to Commons, but any CC-BY image may also be uploaded to Commons. CC-BY-SA (attribution-sharealike) content can also go on Commons. Only CC licenses with an "ND" (no derivatives) or "NC" (non-commercial) condition can't be uploaded. Obviously we make derivatives of images all the time, and our content is also used commercially (for instance, in areas with no internet access, printouts of Wikipedia are sold commercially; barriers to market entry are not high, which keeps prices down). So Wikipedia needs permission to modify content and use it commercially, even though we are non-commercial. There are other, rarer, compatible licenses; see Commons:Licensing for details as needed.

If you are in doubt as to whether a license is allowed on Commons, the simplest route is to try uploading it; for all but the rarest licenses, the Wizard will tell you if the license is incompatible. Also, if you do make a mistake and upload some images that are copyright (as I have, but only a couple times), someone will catch the mistake, investigate, talk to you, and take it down. Honest mistakes that are fixed once caught are not penalized, on Commons or in law.

If you'd prefer to upload the images under CC-BY, do that; if you include the publication date, someone else may well re-label them as public domain, but it needn't be you. Just clicking the "export" tab and exporting them would be great, if you have time.

Historically, every Wikipedia had its own image repository. Anytime someone wanted to use an image from one language of Wikipedia on another language, they had to re-upload the image. The was a collossal waste of editor time, so Commons was created, to hold images that all the Wikiprojects could use. The vestigial Wikipedia-specific image repositories are now ~only used for uploading fair-use copyright material (for instance, File:Johnsegrue.jpg, or the images in Sturm Cigarette Company). There has been discussion of making it impossible to upload images with Commons-compatible licenses to the local Wikipedia repository, but it hasn't been done yet. Also, when you click on an image in Wikipedia, it brings you to a fake local-repository page, and you have to click on another link to get to the Commons page for that image, which is a timewasting absurdity, and I don't know why we haven't abolished it yet.

Of course you can ask for advice, anytime. I've used plenty of it, I'm only too happy to provide some for a change! That editor's edits do look problematic. The standard thing to do would be to template them with a user-warning template on their talk page, probably Template:Uw-paid1, but I think a gentler approach might work better here, like putting them in touch with GLAM (the museum outreach group) to guide their efforts. Would it be okay with you if I looked after it? I'm sure you could manage, and you are as entitled to intervene as I am, but you don't have to and you're right that it's not a beginner-friendly task. HLHJ (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HLHJ

Thank you so much for responding so quickly. I have exported those two images to the Commons (although, somehow, I have duplicated them, is there a way of merging the two into one?) and, in future, I will upload them to the Commons directly under the CC-BY licence.

I would really appreciate it if you could deal with the editor as, like you say, this feels like a task for a more experienced and knowledgeable editor.

QueenPuck (talk) 18:54, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Luck of when I'm online, I'm afraid.

I've nominated Mary's image for an uncontroversial deletion. Walter's is duplicated too, so I suspect this is just part of how the Commons-export tool works and it will get deleted automatically soon. If it doesn't I'll template it for deletion, too. I'll talk to that editor, thank you for bringing it to my attention. HLHJ (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HLHJ

Great, thank you!

QueenPuck (talk) 19:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It seems both are now de-duplicated! I've posted a message for the editor, too. HLHJ (talk) 00:44, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been pruned from a list

Hi QueenPuck! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 3 months.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

John Segrue

Hi, This is my Great grandfather... My name is Niall Segrue. I wanted to add some information about the family if possible thank you. 2A00:23C5:A889:D601:FCEF:AA0C:8687:F29B (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]