2009

National Register of Historic Places listings in Wilmington, Delaware

Thanks for finding the error with the Obidiah Dingee House! We know that there are typos besides this in many National Register of Historic Places listings; if you find others, could you please list them here? We've been in contact with people at the Register and are hoping to use this page to see simple errors corrected. Thanks again! Nyttend (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the property listing is typically selected by the person/people in Delaware who nominated it — in the case of buildings that have been listed for a long time, who knows but that the name under which they're listed was current then. All that being said...no reason to have a redlink for a building that already has an article (or the possibility of two articles on the same building!), so thanks for setting up the redirects! Nyttend (talk) 16:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wilimington images

Anything in and around Rodney Square should be easy for me, I work right there. Only Canon G10 quality though - I don't usually lug the Canon DSLR around with me on a daily basis. You will find my Commons contributions at commons:Special:Contributions/Ukexpat. I will leave you and Nyttend talk page messages when I have uploaded new stuff. – ukexpat (talk) 19:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

St. Anthony of Padua (church)

Good work on this article. Raul654 (talk) 04:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Woolworth's

Nice job of updating the article. I wanted to let you know that the Park Service has most of the nominations for National Register properties in Delaware online as scanned PDFs - you can use the search function [1], or enter the NRHP number directly at http://pdfhost.focus.nps.gov/docs/NRHP/Text/xxxxxxx.pdf. Acroterion _(talk) 14:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, that's totally cool! I just added an external link to the article. Before I start adding it to others local sites maybe you can help me further. Is there anything on that NPS site that gives me permission to copy those JPEG photos straight into the Wikipedia articles? (Let me be up front and say the only thing I know about copyright law is that adding a picture using fair use rationale starts an argument in Wikipedia.) If it takes awhile to get back to me because you're busy deleting Milkshake Flavor articles, I totally understand.RevelationDirect (talk) 03:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I missed your response above - after I deleted 10,000 milkshake flavors I got into a discussion with an earnest person about his totally fictional Russian/Iranian airplane that goes Mach 5, is stealthy, can go to the moon and back, etc.; he swears he's seen it and wants to argue with the other 20 editors who tag it as a fictional aircraft from a '90s game. Argh.

Anyway, I suspect the public domain statement is wrong, at least in the context of Wikipedia/Commons' free-content policies. The text is generally considered public domain, but I am skeptical about the image - it was taken by an employee of the city of Wilmington in 1984, not by an U.S. government employee in their official duties or by a contractor to the U.S.government. I think as a matter or practice I would avoid uploading the nomination pictures. They're usually of comparatively poor quality in any case. Historic American Building Survey images, on the other hand, are unrestricted, and usually of excellent quality. The problem is that they don't cover everything. I'm going to rummage around in the focus.nps website and see if there's a copyright polcy statement in there somewhere. I'll let you know if I find something. Acroterion _(talk) 14:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting from the focus.nps website's disclaimer: Ownership: Information presented on this website, unless otherwise indicated , is considered in the public domain. It may may be distributed or copied as is permitted by the law. Not all information on this website has been created or is owned by the NPS. If you wish to use any non-NPS material, you must seek permission directly from the owning (or holding) sources. That's pretty unambiguous - it's public domain unless otherwise noted, and they go on in each listing to state PD or not, so I'd say, as long as it's so noted in the individual listings, it's fine. I believe I'll go off and see what I can use myself. Thanks for bringing it up! Acroterion _(talk) 19:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it's public domain, you should credit the original photographer with as much detail as you can find, just on general principles. The public domain license tag for Commons is {{PD-USGov-NPS}}. Acroterion _(talk) 19:26, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw part of this conversation on Acroterion's Talk page. Hey, no, I am afraid you are misinterpreting the status here. In the NPS Focus system there is an erroneous computer system message saying Public Domain for all photos, whether they are copyright or public domain. The NPS does not own copyright on photos taken by state employees or private applicants for NRHP status, and the NPS's erroneous label is unhelpful for us but it not a mistake that allows us to claim those are PD. They are not PD if the photos are attributed to anyone such as a named photographer. It sounds like in this case that the NPS Focus pics are specifically credited to a non-Federal employee and/or a state organization. The NPS does not gain copyright by receipt of the NRHP application. This would be a case where the material is not owned by NPS. (It is true that HABS pics are clearly public domain, because the contracting with photographers was set up as contract work for copyright to be taken that way.) I have some notes at Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#some but not all National Park Service photos are public domain because i have been involved in some photo issues on this matter in the past. Hope this helps somewhat. I'll watch here and at Acroterion's talk page to discuss further perhaps. doncram (talk) 11:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Having had some experience with the Park Service (I worked for the NPS in graduate school) I asked them to see whether they were serious about the public domain notice. They have it all screwed up, so the answer is, no, regardless of what they say, the images can't be released into the public domain. Acroterion _(talk) 12:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm glad I haven't spent any time loading photos yet. OK, so they say their PD but aren't. Unless they are anonymous or from a federal employee (the latter being unlikely if these are submissions to the NPS I'm looking at) I can not use them. Does simply publishing that these images as PD at some point move them into the public domain?RevelationDirect (talk) 02:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, because the original author's copyright can't be involuntarily canceled by another party, unless there's a contract or release that specifically states the terms. In this case, there's not, so the NPS's assertion has no legal effect. They're still the property of the author. Acroterion _(talk) 02:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that makes sense. My one man WikiProject Woolworth's will just have to trudge on without them.RevelationDirect (talk) 02:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I replied at my Talk page to your question about the Woolworth's Building in Coahoma County, Mississippi, including trying to give u the info about how to request NRHP application documents for any NRHP-listed place. Glad you're on the Woolworth's beat... :) doncram (talk) 17:39, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Yazoo and Mississippi Valley Railroad

I'm not sure if it makes sense to make this a separate category, or to simply place everything in Category:Illinois Central Railroad, which seems to have owned the Y&MV from its incorporation in 1882. How large do you see this category becoming? (By the way, I removed Queen and Crescent Route, which had nothing to do with the Y&MV. This map shows the Y&MV in blue; the Q&C went from Cincinnati to New Orleans, with the Shreveport branch crossing the Y&MV at Jackson and Vicksburg.) --NE2 23:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had forgotten about that, but it's a very minor part of the Y&MV's history; the actual railroad companies were the A&V and VS&P. It was, in any case, really the IC acquiring them; they just decided to lease them to their Y&MV subsidiary. --NE2 00:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Twelve Tribes etc

Hello,

I'm very new to Wikipedia and I'm not sure what the best course of action is to take in this matter. User: Chezikah has been editing the articles related to the Twelve Tribes from a very biased perspective - and has given no indication or communication that this will cease anytime soon. This is a learning experience for me, so: what is to be done? Thanks -- Jaybird vt (talk) 01:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My response is on your Talk pageRevelationDirect (talk) 04:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your assistance. If I may ask, how did you come across this conflict? Jaybird vt (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your question on my talk page - I'm not sure how to go about finding the link to the vandalism complaint; however Chezikah (talk · contribs) has been blocked, seems indefinitely. Thanks for your help and support! Peace Jaybird vt (talk) 23:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, I wanted to draw your attention to Talk:The Twelve Tribes (movement)#RfC: Reliability of Twelve Tribes website as source for article; this issue is particularly persistent!! Jaybird vt (talk) 02:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Brandywine Museums & Gardens Alliance

Hi, I've been cleaning up the museum categories across the US and recently deleted "museums in Delaware" from Category:Brandywine Museums & Gardens Alliance and will no doubt eventually get to Pennsylvania at some point. In it's place, I put the better category of Museum Organizations. You just effectively reverted the change so I came here to discuss. This Alliance is not a museum, though of course part of its charter are museums. I went through and made sure the individual museums were appropriately tagged. Comments? dm (talk) 00:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS, I'm also fine with rolling Museum organizations out of the state level, sorry, that might have been habitual. I do feel the Alliance belongs in a Museum Organization category rather than the Museum cat itself... Thoughts dm (talk) 04:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Museum cats

Hi, I'm just going through the state "museum" categories, one by one. Im up to Illinois by the way. I've created my share of articles in the past, mostly NRHP articles. We all contribute in different ways.

In any case, I realize smaller state like Delaware or Idaho (well, small in museum counts) have an imbalance in categories. I've tried to avoid single museum categories, but between the "type" categories and "location categories, I've also tried to bring them in line across the country. Feel free to suggest recat articles you think could be rolled up into higher level categories (Asian art museums -> Art museums) for example. You'll note I leave a museum at the higher level unless there are enough of the lower level. Sometime, there's only one museum of a type in a state, or in a county. Especially in Georgia, which has an enormous number of counties. If you want to discuss further, I'd suggest bringing it to WP:Museum I look forward to seeing your new museum articles. dm (talk) 04:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]