User talk:WikiBlackledge
|
 |
Hello WikiBlackledge. Replies have been posted to your question at the Help desk. If the problem is solved, please place {{Resolved|1=~~~~}} at the top of the section. Thank you! Equendil |
| You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{helpdeskreply}} template. |
Monte Cervantes references
[edit]Hi, very nice article, make sure you submit it to DYK when it's finished so it gets shown off on the front page. I have given you an example of multiple use of references in the article, basically you give the first instance a name, then you tag subsequent occurences with just the name tag.
However, I feel I need to give you some general advice on references because you are going a little astray here;
- Other Wikipedia articles are not considered references (either German or English). This is because they are not considered reliable sources. This might seem like a strange thing to say, but consider the fact that anybody can edit this encyclopedia without any checks. The normal thing to do is to put a note at the bottom of the references that some of this article was translated from the German wiki article (as you have done) and put a wikilink to the article at the bottom,
[[de:Monte Cervantes]], after the category link. These interwiki links don't behave like normal links: it will cause a link to appear in the "languages" sidebox of the page. If you want to use the link in the body of the article as well you put a colon in front of it like so[[:de:Monte Cervantes]]which gets you this de:Monte Cervantes. You can also pipe it as with a normal wikilink which you can use to get rid of the project prefix:[[:de:Monte Cervantes|Monte Cervantes]]gets Monte Cervantes. English Wikipedia articles should just be wikilinked in the text. - Putting reference tags in headings is frowned upon. It interferes with various processes such as linking to anchor points in articles.
- There are several books in this Google books search string that have preview enabled and you might be able to use as references. Everyone is usually very happy with book references.
- You should surround the category links with
<nowiki></nowiki>tags while the article is in userspace. This prevents your userspace being listed in the category. Also, the categories you have chosen do not actually exist. Here are some that do exist;
- [[Category:20th-century ships]]
- [[Category:1920s ships]]
- [[Category:Passenger ships]]
- [[Category:Shipwrecks in the Atlantic Ocean]]
- [[Category:20th-century ships]]
Sorry for going on so much. Hope that helps you. SpinningSpark 22:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
SpinningSpark, this is great help! Thank you! WikiBlackledge (talk) 09:41, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- No problem, just drop a note on my talk page if I can help some more. SpinningSpark 09:52, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Determining licensing on Flickr photos
[edit]{{helpme}} The Wikipedia help page on images suggests Flickr as a possible source for public domain photos along with Commons. I would like to use some photos to illustrate a short article on Monte Cervantes (container ship) - I have found several that would work (or I could create a gallery out of several) on Flickr (and none in Commons). However, after reading:
[1], I am confused by what I need to do to use Flickr photos in my Wikipedia account. The easiest path appears to request that the Flickr owner upload the photos I want into Wikipedia Commons. However: That is asking him perhaps to give up something he may have already agreed to. Is it possible for me to determine what the licensing is (already) on a particular Flickr photo so I can just use it or upload it myself?
One of the confusing parts of the Howie_Berlin reference discussion is that a Flickr owner can apparently change his copyright license at any time ... would greatly appreciate some insight here! --WikiBlackledge (talk) 18:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hello Wikiblackledge, I'll attempt to explain this as best as I can. If you need any clarification, please feel free to reply back to me (on this page). Firstly, the copyright owner of any work or image can choose to change his license terms at any time. That's to say if I restricted all permissions with All Rights Reserved (a non-free license), then I have the ability to change it to a Wikimedia Commons compatible license (cc-by-sa or cc-by). To determine the copyright of a flickr image, just scroll down to the box on the left that says, "Additional Information." There, you may see "(c) All Rights Reserved," which means that we can't use it, or this, "Some rights reserved." By clicking that link, you can determine what permissions are licensed from the copyright holder. We only allow these two licenses: [1] [2]. This doesn't imply that we can't use other licenses, such as Public Domain or older/newer version of the Creative Commons licenses (such as cc-by v3). Flickr uses those two licenses (at the moment) as choices for all image uploaders. Howie, in that situation, uploaded his images under a license that couldn't be used (by-nc-nd). He didn't want to upload them under by-sa or by (acceptable licenses). If there's anything I missed, just feel free to ask. blurredpeace ☮ 18:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
{{helpme}}
So would it make sense for me to send a message like this to a Flickr member who owns a photo of a subject I wish to illustrate:
Hi - I am currently working up a short article on Monte Cervantes (container ship) for Wikipedia (English). I note you have three great photos posted on Flickr of the Monte Cervantes - however your rights are reserved so I cannot use them in the article.
Is it possible you have some other photos of Monte Cervantes that you would be willing to share and perhaps upload to Wikipedia Commons? The only two categories of license that Wikipedia can use are:
- Attribution 2.0 Generic and
- Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic
Of course the work would be attributed to you in the Wikipedia Commons description.
Thanks for your consideration,
my signature block
- Yes, you can ask him. Hopefully he will agree, but there's no guarantee that will happen. But yes, that is a good message to send, very clear. Killiondude (talk) 23:13, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
TUSC token abeffd6c9cc959244d9ab14955e31a5c
[edit]I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
Ready to Publish?
[edit]{{helpme}} My First Article I have been working for some time on article on the Monte Cervantes [linked from my WikiBlackledge user page] and now consider it ready to move over to Wikipedia.org and publish. I have the references on how to complete that process. First: I will do a couple of things with photographs, and will remove the nowiki tags around the Categories - other than those areas, at this time I would appreciate review by a Wiki guru so I can correct (and learn) before "my" article is subject to the "relentless editing" of the Wikipedia culture.
I also have a small article on Monte Cervantes (container ship) [also linked from my user page] mostly created for disambiguity reasons. Comments on that article are welcome as well. --WikiBlackledge (talk) 00:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- A laundry list of comments:
- Are the menu and fares really valuable content?
- You have citations to other English-language Wikipedia articles. Why don't you just wikilink them?
- What is the Literature section? This list should probably have more context.
- You should probably try to find more English-language sources. I'm not sure what the policy is with translations of other Wikipedia articles.
- Hope these help. To me, it looks good enough to move into the main article space and let others "[relentlessly edit]" it. :-) —C45207 | Talk 01:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- You may also want to take a look at WP:Rfc.—C45207 | Talk 01:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Did You Know problem
[edit]
Hello! Your submission of Monte Cervantes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Art LaPella (talk) 05:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I have responded to the issues identified - do I now delete this "Did You Know problem" section? What is the process for telling Art LaPella to re-visit my nomination? I am hoping he is watching my talk page. --WikiBlackledge (talk) 14:18, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- You have indeed responded to the hook length issue. It is short enough. Thank you. I do basic proofreading, but others do approvals. Someone else will review your nomination more subjectively in a few days, as described at A2.
- You could delete this section from your own user page if you want to, but the usual practice is to leave everything as is. That will eventually lead to your talk page getting too long, although you haven't come anywhere near that point yet. When it gets too long, the usual practice is to store the older part of the page as described at WP:ARCHIVE.
- Removing my comment at Template talk:Did you know#Monte Cervantes is against the rules, although it doesn't matter this time because you meant well and because you didn't know that rule. But for next time, please don't delete other people's comments (except maybe on your own talk page; for other exceptions, click WP:TPO). Art LaPella (talk) 21:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)