User talk:JimPercy

Hello, JimPercy, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, just type {{helpme}} and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, see the help pages or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Technopat (talk) 17:47, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} I wrote an article for the first time, yesterday. See: Paul Martin (Illustrator). A "watchdog" at Wikipedia put three error messages at the sight yesterday, too. They were warnings about my write-up being too much like an advertisement... not meeting the notably guidelines...and being orphan. My reply. 1. I rewrote the piece in hopes of satisfying the first warning. 2. I don't think someone who played a major role in one of the top three trademark ions of the first half of the 20th century, and illustrated dozens of covers for Collier's, is a non-notable. I've listed some of his cover credits near the bottom, and that is a work in progress. I'm sure the credits would double over time. 3. I did actually set up a link to "Collier's Weekly," so it's not a complete orphan. (I mean, I inserted the name "Paul Martin," into the Collier's Weekly article.)

Again, I received these warnings within hours of my first listing on Wikipedia. This is all very new to me. I didn't know how to respond to the "watchdog" who put these warning messages in my editing box. Hence, after I rewrote the piece yesterday, I deleted the warning messages from my editing box. But, they were put back in there by the same party, when I woke up this morning. Thanks, "Jim Percy"

Greetings again, JimPercy. Don't despair! I realise for a newcomer such notices send the shivers up yer spine, but I don't think you' have too much to worry about. The editor who slapped 'em on is very experienced and if there had been real any motive for deleting the article, would probably have proposed deletion. As they stand, they just mean the article needs tidying up and wikifying. I'll try to get some work done on it later. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 15:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to that advice: those are called "maintenance templates" and are not too much cause for worry - if someone had thought the article really unsuitable you might have seen something like {{db-spam}} or {{db-person}} (click on those to see what the template would have looked like). Once you put an article in, it is no longer "your" article - see WP:OWN - and others may edit it or (as in this case) add templates which suggest areas for improvement, and which in turn may attract yet others to help. If you have questions about why a template has been added, look in the article history to see who added it, and post a question on his talk page (click on "talk" beside the username).

For notability, what you want to add is something written about the subject. Just listing things he has done may not be enough. The point of the notability test is that we don't decide whether a subject is interesting or important enough for an article - we ask: has someone else, independent of the subject, thought it interesting and important enough to write about? See WP:Notability, WP:Notability (people) and other guidelines linked from them.

There's good advice in the links from the "Welcome" paragraph above, especially WP:Your first article. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:23, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Technopat. Your work really made a big difference in improve the article. Plus, your coming up with those two books (illustration) credits. I'll try reading up on mentioned. "Jim Percy"

Hello JimPercy. You used the {{helpme}} tag but you did not post a question. Please write out your question and when you are done, place back the tag. I or someone else will be along to help. Alternatively, you can ask your question at the new contributors help desk, the help desk, or join the #wikipedia-en-help IRC help channel to get real-time assistance. Click here for instant access.

Algebraist 16:52, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Algebra, thanks but I already received technical help. I'm new to this and so I did it wrong. I put the "help me" in those double quotes and my message underneath, but maybe I should have put my entire message in double quotes. I'll have to study the process more. Again, I no longer need the help but thanks. "Jim Percy"

Greetings again, JimPercy. Before I forget, when you edit this/any other page, don't you forget to "sign" your edit (hit the 10th icon from the left above) and fill in the edit summary below.

Re. the Paul Martin article, you really need to find some sort of verifiable references. As JohnCD points out above, however notable "we" know an artist etc. to be, what matters is that someone else has written about them. I suspect the case of illustrators is similar to what happens with session musicians, which is my particular field of knowledge: however notable and admired they are as "musicians' musicians" what counts is that some generally ignorant music critic/journalist has actually - in taking a break from raving about the pop star of the moment - mentioned them in an article or book that can then be used as a reliable source. I've been googling trying to find such references on Martin but have so far drawn a blank. Can you come up with any - obituaries, etc. - don't worry about formatting them - I, or others, can help out with that.

But as I mentioned above, don't despair - despite the energetic efforts of some editors to reduce Wikipedia to a collection of articles on notable Pokémon characters and NFL players, the Wikipedia community is wise and there's plenty of folks out there who can come up with that missing link - usually just at the last minute. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 23:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Technopat. A main problem with finding information on Paul Martin is that his untimely death at age 49, seemed to make him fade from memory. I'm sure that people who have an old Collier's magazine with the name Paul Martin imprinted on the cover, have no idea who he is. The same would hold true of people who collect Fisk Tire Boy statues, figurines, pictures etc. He either died in Jan or Feb of 1932. Probably Feb of '32. His home in Ossining combined as a studio. (Hhmm. Maybe that last line should be added to the text.) It would take some research to find his obit. Also, references to him would likely be from during his living-in years, which could be a challenge to locate. I know he illustrated many book covers for a New York City book publishing company, but I can't find proof. Might it add color to the listing to change one line in the text to: "His signed work can be seen in the Saturday Evening Post magazine from Aug. 23, 1930 on page 38 (see picture in corner or to right or to left etc.)" I have that original magazine (minus the Norman Rockwell cover) and just scanned the picture on page 38. Its size in the magazine is about 2.5 x 3.5 inches, within the blue area.) Paul Martin's signature is very hard to see but it's next to the boy's left foot. I wouldn't know how to include this picture into the listing, though. I just scanned this picture up to my image hosting software (called Photobucket)and it can be seen at: http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv171/Tooper/SmilingBoy.jpg Does it matter that my name is within that above URL tag, in regards to privacy? (The part: Tooper.) I don't know if this is feasible adding this small picture to the listing, but I thought now might be a good time to see if it is. Yes, I noticed that some listings at Wikipedia on NFL players etc. are very short and that information is available elsewhere, too. I'm trying to do the opposite, provide information that is not offered elsewhere else. Thanks for past assistance. (JimPercy 05:36, 27 March 2010 (UTC))

Greetings again. Don't forget to click on that 10th button. After my breezy offer to help out with the formatting, I'm afraid I can't help you much with graphics - don't "do" pics. And not too well up on copyright, either. I'll give it a go, anyhow. And we'll see what the community says... Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 09:41, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technopat. Hello again. I really appreciate your help, and feel I might need to ask for your assistance at least this one more time. First of all, I'm a little confused over what you mean by the 10th button, from the left. My guess was that meant the "my/your preferences" tab, and I verified my gender, name, email address and then clicked "saved." Anyway, I know I need to learn and read up on the ins and outs of Wikipedia. I tried to all a line to the "reference" with mixed results. The line is there, but the size and color is off. Plus, there is an odd rectangular dash box all around it. I like this reference because the book shows a picture of each of the top ten trademark icons of all-time (according to Reader's Digest), and the Fisk Tire Boy is one of them. I'd truly appreciate your help in formatting same, so it doesn't look funny. This is the line I'm referring to: 2. Famous Trademarks: America A to Z, by Reader's Digest, 1997, pp. 364-65. (PS. The name of the book is "America A to Z." The name of this section in the book is "Famous Trademarks.")

Also, I noticed that in the "external link" for "illustrators," that Paul Martin's last name is listed under the "P" column, but it should be under the "M" column. Also, I added an external link called "Defunct Magazines of the United States." Please delete it, add to it or change it, as you feel best. I doubt I would have had much chance of this being approve without your assistance, so I really do appreciate your help. I still don't know for sure how things will turn out. I will try to find Martin's obit and more information when I have the chance to do so. PS. The picture came out good, though I noticed some insignia needs to be clicked to see it. (JimPercy 04:58, 28 March 2010 (UTC))

Greetings JimPercy. Wikipedia is pretty confusing for newcomers, so don't worry 'bout asking for help - there's plenty of folks out in the Wikipedia community ready to help out (though you need to keep an eye out for some elements, such as the Big Bad Wolf which takes a snap at the best of us on occasions).

I'd left a note to you re. the reference at the article's discussion page, but you've answered it here, so I'll head off and fix it. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 12:53, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Paul Martin (illustrator) has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv171/KJWilley/RC.jpg (matching the regex rule [a-z][0-9]+\.photobucket\.com/albums/.*\.(?:jpg|jpeg|gif|png|svg)). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 15:29, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings JimPercy. Sorry, forgot to answer your query on this one. Basically, when you click on "Edit this page" above, you're faced with a blank space in which to write your message. In theory - though it might depend on what sort of software you're using - you should see a series of icons over said space: the first one on th eleft is the letter B (for Bold). Again in theory, the 9th one from the left will be a W inside a red circle and crossed out. The following one should be a squiggly thing. If it is, and you click on it, you'll be signing your edit. Give it a go, click on "Show preview" below and see if anything's happened. Hope that helps. By the way, the message above this one is an automated Bot text. Can't help you on that one. Copyright issues are NOT my speciality. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 20:58, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technopat. I said I would try not to ask for any more help, but this is a mostly reply on your last post. I'll try signing this text the way you mentioned. (I thought the way to sign my text was with four tildes between quotes. But, I'll try signing it both ways this time.) I opened this edit page and it wasn't blank but full of previous text messages. I could have deleted the oldest emails. But, I'm too new at this to want to do that.) That link to Paul Martin's illustration of a poster for the Junior American Red Cross was great. I was able to make the picture bigger and saw Martin's distinctive signature within the "globe" area of poster, with the ends of the "M" curled in. I tried adding a picture but the Wikipedia system quickly removed it. The problem could have been with my image hosting software Photobucket, but I don't know. I only use them because they are free. (But, I know you already commented on this, that copyright issues are not your field of expertise.) Also, in regard to the external link of "Defunct Magazines of the United States": I click onto this, and don't think that Martin's name should be under the "M" column, since he's not the name of a magazine. I noticed thought that "Farm & Fireside" and "Collier's," which are both mentioned in the Martin article, are correctly listed here, though. Thanks again. --JimPercy 17:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC) (JimPercy 17:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC))

PS. I added a link which shows that American Junior Red Cross poster (Martin's name and date of piece is under the picture's caption.) I don't know if the system will kick it out, so here's the link, minus the ending period: http://american.redcross.org/site/PageNavigator/TheYouthMessenger/selfsustaining. --JimPercy 20:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Well spotted! That poster on the Red Cross website is the clincher. I've removed the redundant templates on the article as it should now pass anyone's test for notability. Please don't hesitate to chase me up with any doubts you may have - might not be able to reply immediately (or at all), but will do me best. Am still intrigued as to why you don't manage to get that signature right... :) Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 20:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bingo! Found the squiggly icon I was looking for: click on the signature button located above the edit window. Cheers! --Technopat

(talk) 11:58, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the touch-ups. I'm still trying to add a little to the article, every now and then.--Jim Percy 03:07, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

In case you didn't see it, I replied to your question at WP:New contributors' help page:

Currently the article has an external link in the middle of prose, which shouldn't be done, and since it's not off-site it shouldn't use the external link method. Also, since the picture does not appear in any article, it will be marked for deletion soon. I'm thinking you might have done this because you don't feel the image can be justified as "fair use" because it's being used as an example of the artist's work, rather than "to provide critical commentary" as it says in the fair use declaration. In that case, it's not likely to remain, even if you put it in the article. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 01:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I did it this way because this work by the artist is a somewhat very minor credit. So, it wouldn't make too much sense (and it would be misleading) to include a picture of the image in the article. One the other hand, the arrow link is the only way to prove the credit, otherwise, it could be lost to history. I reckon that if the image was in a book or on a web site, that a reference tag could just be added onto the end of that sentence. But, if a picture of this item doesn't appear in either, then that would not be an option. Jim Percy 02:18, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that if the picture doesn't belong in the article, it doesn't belong at Wikipedia either. Wikipedia can't be used as a picture hosting site for pseudo-off-site images. There is an automated process that removes pictures that are not used in articles, and so that picture will be gone in a few days. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 12:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have been signing my post with those four ~. So, something else is wrong. I notice that the word "talk" doesn't appear in my signings. Maybe, something is not activated. Jim Percy 02:54, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi again... bots don't watch pages they post on, so your reply to the bot that posted the message above will never see it. As for your signature, you must have a custom signature, or a blank signature with a mark to use it. Go to your "my preferences" (at the top of the screen), and scroll down to the signatures section. To use the default signature (as I do), uncheck the box that says "Sign my name exactly as shown". You may have checked the box not realizing it means to override the default with what's typed in the box above it. (So if the box is empty, your signature becomes blank.) --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 12:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right. That box was checked off. I unchecked it so hopefully that fixed the problem. Maybe my signature that ends this post will be different. If Wiki is going to delete the picture titled "Singin' in the Rain," maybe the following doesn't even matter. Nonetheless, an uncategorized error message came up yesterday. I was clueless what to do, though, in the editing I changed the word "uncategorized" to "calendars" and then "calendars in art." The error message went away, but then a red template appeared to indicate its a missing link. I don't know how to fit this or if it even matters. (I mean, since Wiki is likely to delete the picture in a couple days or so.) I don't think it would be acceptable to download the pic from a computer image hosting program Photobucket, either. Thanks. Jim Percy (talk) 14:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the picture again, I see it is on Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia, and is declared to be in the public domain because it is more than 70 years old. I didn't realize that situation. Unless someone finds evidence that it's not in the public domain, it may stay there and not be deleted. As for photobucket, if it were a non-public-domain picture and it were on photobucket, it would be against Wikipedia's rules to link to it, because it's not allowed to link to copyright violations on external sites. But anyway, the main concern now is that it may be deleted because it's not being used. There is no reason, now, to not put it directly into the article. It's still improper to have it showing as an external link when it's not really external. Regarding the category, you can't put anything into a category that doesn't exist, which is why it shows as a red link. You should put the category back the way it was. If you need help with any of this, let me know. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 20:33, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right. The author passed over 70-years ago, which seemed to put it in public domain. I even entered his birth/death years into the description, just to make that clearer. His signature is in the artwork in the lower left (though a little hard to see). I changed it back to the original way, with the word "uncategorized" in the edit portion. Now, that error message reappears, about the piece being uncategorized. Is there a somewhat simple way for you to categorize it, by placing the pictures under a calendar or art calendar or illustrator section? I'd appreciate this if possible. I reckon, it just can't be an external link. I'd rather not put the picture into the actual article, since artwork on a calendar is really quite minor, compared to his other credits such as popular magazine covers etc. That should do it. (Yes, I thought that was so about photobucket.) Thanks again Jim Percy (talk) 21:10, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, again, if you upload it to Commons and want to refer to it in the article, it must be in the article, or it won't stay, because Commons isn't here for this purpose. It's not a general purpose picture hosting site. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 15:21, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:SmilingBoy.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:25, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:SmilingBoy.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:33, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Boy&pups.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 01:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:BoyandPups.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 01:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} I added a picture to the article: Paul Martin (illustrator). I started writing this article several months ago. Anyway, the picture is of a boy and several puppies. I tried to edit change the Licensing section by adding the words: ""non-free 2D art" in double parenthesis. Which reads:

This image is of a drawing, painting, print, or other two-dimensional work of art, and the copyright for it is most likely owned by either the artist who produced the image, the person who commissioned the work, or the heirs thereof. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of works of art for critical commentary on the work in question, the artistic genre or technique of the work of art or the school to which the artist belongs on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, might be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information. To the uploader: please add a detailed fair use rationale for each use, as described on Help:File page, as well as the source of the work and copyright information.

The image is from a 1931 calendar, and so I thought that this was a more accurate reason why the image should be allowed. I tried to add this mentioned line, into the editing on Licensing, but, in the preview I get a speedy deletion warning. I would like to know how to add that line into the editing, as I think it's a more accurate reason for why the image of the boy and pups should be allowed. Thanks. Jim Percy (talk) 04:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - hang on a moment while I investigate your question. Be right back... :-) - KrakatoaKatie 06:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think I know what's happening. Both of the images that are of that same illustration, File:Pups.jpg and File:BoyandPups.jpg, are now hosted at Commons. I think you're getting a CSD notice because the software thinks trying to create duplicates here by trying to change the local (English Wikipedia) files. Does that make sense? You're 'changing' info on a page that does not exist, so you'll get a WP:CSD#F8 notice on preview (and if you saved it) because F8 covers identical images on Commons. At least I think that's what's going on. Let me know if I was of any help or if I can answer more questions. :-) Thanks! - KrakatoaKatie 06:19, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! Commons only hosts free media, so if you were to upload an image that's not free, such as an image tagged {{Non-free 2D art}}, they would probably speedy delete it (I don't know exactly what their process is because I'm not very active at Commons). I'd imagine that changing the licensing tag of an existing image from a public domain license to a non-free license would start a similar process. I don't know if they even have a non-free 2D art licensing template, since Commons files are all free, all the time.

If you know for certain that the image is not free content, you should notify Commons using whatever deletion process they use. Then you can upload a low-resolution copy here at Wikipedia and tag it appropriately. If Martin drew it before 1923, it's public domain. If not, it's probably not free. I hope that helps. Let me know what happens! :=) - KrakatoaKatie 22:51, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it sounds and looks like you've done it correctly. Things move slower over at Commons - much slower, like the Ice Age - so it may take some time for those files to be deleted. Meanwhile, you can upload your newer version here, with a different file name and {{non-free 2D art}}. Under the summary, along with your fair use rationale, I'd put a quick explanation about the Commons images, so someone or some bot doesn't tag it as a duplicate. And if it is deleted, let me know and I'll restore it. You're doing the right thing here, and we need more editors who are so conscious what is free content and what is not. Thanks! :-) - KrakatoaKatie 01:47, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello. I'm trying to change a licensing tag for a thumbnail picture (one of two) in the article: Paul Martin (illustrator). The picture is File:BoyandPups.jpg. I want to change the current tag of "PD-old" in double parenthesis to "Non-free 2D art" in double parenthesis. The reason is because it fits under the wording of the latter that goes: "It is believed that the use of the low resolution...qualifies as fair use..." (I think that "PD-old" is the wrong tag. If it's not, then just adding the "Non-free 2D art" might be in order.) I tried changing the tag in the editing, but, then got a warning tag in red that goes: "This media file may meet the criteria for speedy deletion..." More Details. The original 1930's Calendar print was downloaded from my scanner. This calender company has been out of business for decades. That's all my wording in the summary box, including in the permission line. Thanks. Jim Percy (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You got an error because the file is actually stored on the Wikimedia Commons, which is an image repository for all Wikimedia projects, including this one. As far as your proposed change goes, that template would not be as good a fit, as it is for works of art that are not yet in the Public Domain. Since this image does in fact qualify for PD, a claim of fair use is not necessary. Furthermore, fair use images cannot be uploaded on Commons, so we would have to move the image back to WP.

If you have a reason why this picture does not qualify for Public Domain, that would be a different story; however, the template currently on the image states that the artist died in 1932, which qualifies as "Death of the author plus 70 years," as the template states. If you have any further questions, you can use the helpme template again, or ask me on my talk page. Happy editing, Robert Skyhawk ^{(T C B)} 20:04, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello. I uploaded the picture "File: Martin gets check.jpg" onto the article "Paul Martin (illustrator)", yesterday. It came from the Dobbs Ferry Register newspaper (upstate New York), of 3-13-1931 p. 13. I cropped off all the text, as only the picture is necessary. It shows Paul Martin (1883-1932) receiving a check from the Girl Scouts' national director Josephine Schain (1886-1972), for winning first place in a poster contest. It is the ONLY known picture of Martin, hence, is very important for the Wikipedia article. It's naturally of poor resolution and its only use is for identification purpose. Anyway, there are a couple warning signs (!) in triangles. I'd like to get rid of them, but I don't know the proper license tag to insert into the box. I'd appreciate help on this matter, very much. Jim Percy (talk) 15:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have already explained that the image is copyrighted; all you could add is that this is the only known image (thus it's not replaceable by a free image. Other than that there's nothing you need to do about these warnings; whether the fair use rationale is appropriate is an issue I'd rather leave to the experts; for example one could argue that since Martin wasn't known for his looks (unlike, say, an actor) and the article doesn't discuss them, an image isn't all that essential. Huon (talk) 15:29, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've added a sentence about "only known" into the Summary box. I also added that a tennis tournament is named after him (a picture of the trophy is in the article). That would be another reason why this image of him should be accepted. The Martin picture is on page 13 of the 1931 newspaper, not the front page. Please make any changes you feel appropriate. Jim Percy (talk) 16:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello. I'd like to add a sentence to the write-up on Paul Martin (illustrator), that goes something like, "This model in later life recalled the Martins as friendly etc..." I think, this would add important information to the article since so little is personally known about this particular illustrator. (It could on the surface seem non-neutral or opinionated, but that's not the case.) I would like to know HOW TO REFERENCE a source received via email or in a phone conversation. Would I have to include the person's name, and write it something like: "John Doe. Personal interview, Feb. 3, 2014." In other words, the information was received orally/via email, hence, it didn't come from the standard magazine or book sources. Thanks, Jim Percy (talk) 16:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid such a source is not acceptable. The WP:Verifiability policy is that "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source." Specifically, the section WP:SOURCE says:

"Source material must have been published, the definition of which for our purposes is "made available to the public in some form". Unpublished materials are not considered reliable."

There is a footnote that "This includes material such as documents in publicly-accessible archives, inscriptions on monuments, gravestones, etc., that are available for anyone to see."The point is that the interested reader should be able, in principle, to check the source. JohnCD (talk) 16:38, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paul Martin (illustrator), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ossining, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Montage of poses for illustrator.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 05:07, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JimPercy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello. I've wrote every word (so far) in this article: Paul Martin (illustrator). It's pretty much complete, as there is practically no more information on him out there. I have a couple questions in regard to same. 1. A couple months ago (or so) a Wikipedia bot changed a few http to https, in the URLs of references. (I reckon for higher security reasons.) The problem with the bot doing that is it turned those external links into dead links. (Namely, ref. #120, 123 and 145.) They all link to a "New York Times" article. Hence, I undid the change done by the bot, and converted the https back to http. 2. I notice that it's becoming common for Wikipedia article's references to have four columns. Is this the new standard? I think this article works better with three columns, as it's a combination of references and notes. Thanks. Jim Percy (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding #1, the entire Internet is currently evolving from http to https. You can delve into the rationale behind that particular bot here: User:Bender235. Regarding #2, the syntax {{Reflist|n}} which specifies n columns of equal width regardless of the available display width, is deprecated (and is disabled for mobile view). The current practice is to specify a flexible width like this: {{Reflist|30em}} which will work on all devices. Please let me know if you have further questions. Scottyoak2 (talk) 15:40, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so it should be changed to {{Reflist|30em}} so every device can pick up on the columns, and eventually I should change those three http to https (unless another bot does beforehand). Thanks. Jim Percy (talk) 16:18, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you already figured out that the tlx template is just for illustrative text, and you've made the Reflist column width edit already. Good work :)

You needn't be concerned with the http/https links. The Internet is rapidly adapting to that issue, and it's increasing being handled on the receiving end (i.e., at the webhost of the NYT), so it's becoming a non-issue within Wikipedia articles. I took at look into the bot change that you experienced several weeks ago: it shouldn't be back to edit-war with you. So, no worries. Scottyoak2 (talk) 19:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Paul Martin (illustrator), studio portrait.jpg, which you've attributed to a relative of the subject of the photo. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC) Hello. This picture was never before published. I am the sole owner of the original picture. It was given to me by a relative of Paul Martin. I am also a relative of Paul Martin. This picture is of vital importance for the article. Otherwise, there is no picture of him to led this article. Thanks. Jim Percy (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright law is a lot more complicated than you might expect. Please refer to commons:Commons:Hirtle chart for more information. If the image is an unpublished work created in the United States, the copyright does not expire until 120 years after creation. Therefore a photo taken in 1908 is not in the public domain until 2028. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reply. According to that link, the tag was wrong. Note wording "Unpublished work: known author with a known date of death. 70 years after death of author." PD-US-unpublished & PD-old-70. Yes, it is an unpublished work, and yes, 70 years have passed since Martin's death in 1932. Jim Percy (talk) 00:53, 4 December 2017 (UTC) The key wording seemingly is: "It Meets One of the Following Conditions." Yes it does! Jim Percy (talk) 15:09, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JimPercy. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

TODAY, I uploaded a better picture (than the old one I uploaded in 2016) of the H-O Oats billboard. It didn't take. I can't figure out what went wrong. Re. article: Paul Martin (illustrator). See first picture on left side. More. Uploaded picture shows up on the "file history" page, but does NOT transfer into the article. Jim Percy (talk) 23:50, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like a cache issue to me. I see the correct image on the page, but if you have cached the version of the page with the old image, it may take some time to get displayed properly. You may want to reload the page on your end and, if that doesn't help, purge the server cache, maybe. Huon (talk) 00:10, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Hitting the reload button seems to do the trick. Jim Percy (talk) 01:07, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello. I'm in need of help. Today, I uploaded an image. It's of questionable quality (non-avoidable, also a spec too dark), but very important in establishing facts in the article: Paul Martin (illustrator). Anyway, I need an administrator to permanently remove the original upload at 16:49 for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Girl_Scouts_Competition_Letter.jpg It contains the addressees' street name which was not my intent. I removed it in the second upload, due to privacy concerns. No other change was made! I also explained this in "Other Information" (in order to not mislead). However, reckon a few X's along that line would work too. (I did that once before for the mailing envelope illustrated in the same article. 5th picture down from right side.) Thanks, JP Jim Percy (talk) 18:20, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky I have two hats! You would be better asking at commons if you need to in future, as the admins here can't fix it unless they are admins on commons (and there is only about 200 of us there) - Image Revision Deleted. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:44, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for solving the dilemna. I thought that might be the case, but couldn't find the talk page there, so just asked in the regular section. I'll have to scroll around more next time. I just never before asked a Wikimedia (or commons) related question. (I recall once reading about the 200 total.) Jim Percy (talk) 19:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello. I uploaded a file to Wikipedia by mistake, about two weeks. I meant to upload it to WikiCommons. So, I'm now trying to figure out how to transfer it from Wikipedia to Commons. I don't want to click the "Upload file" as that would seemingly cause duplication. I think I could do it if only could figure out the starting point. I did place a license tag for transfer on the file's page a week or so ago. The problem is that this image is not internally linked to any Wikipedia article, but is very important in backing up a particular Wikipedia article. Hence, reckon, doesn't belong at the former. Re. File:Foreign Service Poster Letter.jpg Thanks, Jim Percy (talk) 21:58, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I were you, I'd simply upload the file to Commons and then tag the one on Wikipedia with {{db-f8}}, which is our speedy deletion template for files also available on Commons. 78.28.45.127 (talk) 22:16, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Moving files to Commons. Or add {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} to the image page - might take quite a while before someone gets round to it. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:50, 7 July 2018 (UTC) I just completed the changeover. Tagged the one at Wikipedia for deletion. No change to image. Just rewrote the appropriate description detail. Thks for help. Jim Percy (talk) 23:54, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JimPercy. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JimPercy, the redirect Josephine Schain was supposed to link to Minnesota Woman Suffrage Memorial#Josephine Schain but I made an error. I have fixed it now. Thanks for pointing out my error. Leschnei (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Leschnei: Okay, good you picked up on my comments in brief. The internal link would need to make sense to the reader (though I understand it). Jim Percy (talk) 23:11, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paul Martin (illustrator), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:MartinAtNet.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:39, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JimPercy! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 05:54, Friday, July 16, 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:32, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on '"Farm Journal" (magazine) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Randykitty (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to American Junior Red Cross. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. JTtheOG (talk) 06:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just added more detail and a key reference, and it didn't go through due to your edit. JimPercy (talk) 06:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JimPercy,

Thank you for creating American Junior Red Cross.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

More sources exist and article should rely less on Red Cross Primary sources. Also make explicit the relation between AJRC and the American Red Cross itself. For example https://www.inquirer.com/philly/blogs/public_health/Bet-you-never-heard-of-the-American-Junior-Red-Cross.html

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Shushugah}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shushugah: Ok, I added the article's second sentence as a tie-in. I also added an informative link to Google Books from the drop-down menu. My original intent was only to start-up the article with a good overall view. JimPercy (talk)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Middle States Championships, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nathaniel Niles.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:14, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. JimPercy (talk) 20:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JimPercy. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Paul Martin (illustrator), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. You have uploaded images "passed down the family line... from my own collection" and others as licenced by the heirs of Martin's spouse. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a relation, and there is no conflict of interest. I mentioned that on the WP "Help Desk" (Sep 15). I have zero vested interest. However, my effort was to be very precise. For instance, it took a lot of documentation and work to pinpoint exactly where the artist lived from year to year. I recall describing one of his posters as being "striking." I thought about that one for a while. But I figured it was okay since it was backed up with a reference using that exact word (re. ref. 134). BTW. I also reworded ref. 29, which you felt was unclear. Or was that someone else. I wasn't expecting this avalanche (involvement of multiple editors). JimPercy (talk) 19:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PosterArtists.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:34, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:PosterArtists.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:24, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

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) 00:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]