User talk:Tim1965/TalkArchives12

Yogo pre-FAC review

We have someone looking at this for FAC preparation. Casliber is commenting on the article talk page. PumpkinSky talk 12:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

See Talk:Yogo_sapphire#Pre-FA_nom_round_of_edits. If you can great, if not, not a problem.PumpkinSky talk 00:31, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think this would be a free image since AFAIK jewelery is considered art and you'd have to upload it as FU, but you probably know more about FU that I do.PumpkinSky talk 11:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

• I think if I focused on a just one Yogo in the piece, that would suffice under fair use (as illustrative of the use of the gemstone). It also depends on when the piece was created, if the copyright was renewed, and all that stuff. I'll check on that. - Tim1965 (talk) 16:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

The Man Who Fell in Love with the Moon

Hey, this article appears to be fairly well fleshed out. Have you ever considered putting it up for a Good article nomination? Sadads (talk) 18:51, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

• I have no experience promoting an article to GA status in the Literature category. Do you know of someone who would be willing to do a pre-GA pass on the article to identify problems? - Tim1965 (talk) 01:59, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Good stuff

		The Original Barnstar
		Hi, friend. I just bumped into some of your stuff today and I just wanted to drop by and congratulate you on your excellent work as a content contributor. An Old School barnstar for Old School quality work... Carrite (talk) 01:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Yogo reshoot

Your attention is requested here: Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#Reshoot_of_Yogo_sapphires. PumpkinSky talk 23:27, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

GREAT pic of Conchita Yogo and fair use rationale! Thanks for taking the trouble to take the photo. See talk page about my sad efforts. PumpkinSky talk 00:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

• I am astonished at the problems with getting FA status for this. But I have become cynical about Wikipedia in the past six months, and therefore not surprised. I have had similar problems with getting articles into DYK. I just gave up on that. I improved the article about Ben-Hur and the National Christmas Tree, and refuse to seek DYK status for these five-fold expansions because it's just become so bureaucratic. People who never contribute to articles are passing judgment on articles. It's not about generating content any more, it's about exercising power over others and applying rules. I've stopped trying to get work recognized, and just generate content now. - Tim1965 (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

That's the view of many. See all the row on WT:FAC over restructuring and changing leadership at FA cabal. To me it's more about power and the status quo than improving wiki. I sympathize with you. I would like to get Yogo to FA because it is distinctly and uniquely MONTANAN! PumpkinSky talk 00:31, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

• So would I!  :) I wish I could spend my entire day just researching Montana articles and getting them to FA status. I'd redo that Charlie Russell article first. (His artwork is in the public domain!) - Tim1965 (talk) 00:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Charlie's stuff is PD? Because pre-1923? Ah, they say author+70PumpkinSky talk 00:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

• That's right! He died in 1926, and from the biography I've read he did very little work in his last year or two due to illness. So I'm guessing nearly all his work is PD now. "Last of the Five Thousand" definitely is! That "Author+70" only applies to works created after 1923. (Besides, even if it didn't, author+70 equals 1996! PD!) - Tim1965 (talk) 01:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

So the tags on Charlie's paintings are wrong and we should change them to PD-1923? maybe we can make charlie FA after Yogo.PumpkinSky talk 01:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

• Not all the tags. The key word is "published." Not all of Charlies paintings were published during his lifetime, although a lot were. Many were not published until the 1950s, which means that they fall under the "author+70" rule. And even then, if renewal of the copyright was made, another 28 years could be added (meaning that the works would not come into the public domain until 2024. But many of the paintings were never copyrighted, because copyright law at the time required that famous © symbol. I doubt any of Charlie's works have that. It would take a search at the Library of Congress to determine when each painting was first published, and when the copyright will run out.

For example: I'm going to take photos of the George Washington Masonic National Memorial nearby. But the question has arisen about when the artwork (murals, paintings, statues, etc.) inside the building were created, when they were published, if they were copyrighted in the first place, and if that copyright still exists. I can take photos for my own purposes and post them to Flickr or whatnot, but to get them on Wikipedia means I have to research each one at the Library of Congress. Not gonna be fun. - Tim1965 (talk) 14:32, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Latest pear and purple Yogo sapphire photos

See Talk:Yogo_sapphire#Latest_pear_and_purple_photos. Hope you think they're better, and just in time for the Great Wiki Blackout of jan 2012! PumpkinSky talk 01:05, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Smithsonian Institution Archives Edit-a-Thon and Meetup!

Who should come? You should. Really.
	She Blinded Me with Science: Smithsonian Women in Science Edit-a-Thon will be held on Friday, March 30, 2012 at the Smithsonian Archives in Washington, D.C. This edit-a-thon will focus on improving and writing Wikipedia content about women from the Smithsonian who contributed to the sciences. It will be followed by a happy hour meetup! We look forward to seeing you there!

...and if you do not live in the Washington, D.C. area, please forgive the intrusion and you can delete this invite! Sarah (talk) 04:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Charles M. White (industrialist) for DYK?

Hello, Tim1965. Thank you for writing up this article about Charles White. I have nominated it for DYK. The nomination template can be found here. Please feel free to post alternate hooks there. Please also be encouraged to perform a peer review of another wikicontributor's DYK nomination on the nomination page. Thanks. Happy editing. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 02:13, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of The Big Gay Musical for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Big Gay Musical is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Big Gay Musical (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:11, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Charles M. White

Hello! Your submission of Charles M. White 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! Ishtar456 (talk) 20:38, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Charles M. White

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Modest Barnstar
		You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.7.36 (talk) 20:23, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Vlastimil Koubek

Dear Tim1965,

I am the one who made the corrections to the article about Vlastimil Koubek. I am his daughter, Jana Koubek. While I do appreciate your efforts to bring his significant accomplishments to Wikipedia, I was not even aware that the page existed until yesterday. There were several errors regarding my parents' personal lives and I went in to correct them and to add supplemental information, my "sources" being my parents themselves.

Specifically, I added my father's hometown of Brno. The date of his passing incorrectly read "February 18" at the top of the page; the correct date is February 15, as is correctly noted at right. Secondly, my father NEVER retired!!!! He and his office were in business up until the day he passed away although for the final 2-3 weeks he was unable to go in to the office. I removed and/or corrected any references to that word. Thirdly, regarding my mother: "most of her family had been imprisoned and died in Nazi prison camps ....." is not true. Just one brother was in a concentration camp. Period. Fourthly, my parents arrived in the US (via Ellis Island) on February 8, 1952. They married in New York on August 9, 1952. I will be adding that fact back in. The correct amount of money they had in their pockets upon arrival was $6, not $12. Fifthly, my parents relocated to Washington, DC during the 2 years my father was in the Army and they remained in DC (and my dad in Arlington after he remarried) for the rest of their lives. I was born in DC. Sixthly, my parents NEVER knew each other in Prague; they met in a London bookstore. You correctly stated that but I removed the Prague reference. With regard to my father's architectural career, I have legal possession of all of the archives (drawings and files, etc.) from my father's office. It is a massive collection. As I go through it I will bring any other corrections to your attention. Also, I know that the collective worth of the buildings my father designed over his entire career is vastly in excess of $2 billion. However, I will let that figure stand until I can go through all the records and determine a more accurate value. Similarly, if you wish to add or change anything regarding my parents' personal lives you may verify it with me first. And lastly, please refrain from calling my father a "busy little termite". Thank you very much. Jana Koubek — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkoubek (talk • contribs) 23:38, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

An award for you

Golden Wiki Award Thanks for your recent contributions! 67.80.64.128 (talk) 01:19, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Noice!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your outstanding work on Railway Labor Executives' Association. Carrite (talk) 17:48, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Ernest T. Weir

You did a good job with the Ernest T. Weir article. I really enjoyed it. Caden ^cool 23:08, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you! I'm very glad you liked it. It took a long while to research it, just because the sources weren't on the Web. But it was worth it; Weir had such an interesting life. - Tim1965 (talk) 00:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe you that it took a long while for you to research but I'm glad you did because Weir was a true pioneer in my opinion. I think he was ahead of his time. I also like the picture you uploaded. Very nice. Is there anyway you can upload a picture of his wife Mary Hayward Weir? It would help her article. I find her interesting. She was a little ahead of her time by later marrying a much younger man, Jerzy Kosinski. Today she'd be called a "cougar" if they married in 2012 lol. Caden ^cool 21:24, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Yogo drive

We've restarted working on Yogo sapphire. Your great assistance would be greatly appreciated.PumpkinSky talk 11:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Precious award

	Montana articles
	Thank you for outstanding support and improvement of Montana articles.PumpkinSky talk 07:37, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Conchita image

See this inline comment from Nikkimaria "image description page needs more information on copyright - who holds copyright, creator, date of creation, who took the picture, what is the copyright on the picture (contradiction between licensing tag and FUR on this point - need additional licensing tag for photo). This is the image most likely to be challenged, at this point". Could you please address this? Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 18:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• Well, I added sources to the image summary, and a discussion on the image Talk page. I don't see what the issue is with the author of the photo; the Summary section clearly indicates that I took the picture, and on what date. The real issue is whether Fair Use has been met. - Tim1965 (talk) 20:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
  • thanks, I've asked Nikki to look at it. PumpkinSky talk 20:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Since copyright has not been registered, it's difficult to determine who owns it. All we can say is "since it's unclear, we must assume the object is copyrighted." Irregardless of who owns it, the Fair Use rules apply. Fair Use is met with that image. If someone wishes to challenge that, I'm all for defending the image. - Tim1965 (talk) 21:00, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
      • Hey Tim. You're correct about presumption of copyright. My remaining concern here is that given it's a photo of a 3D object, we need explicit licensing tags covering both the photo and the object itself. The fair-use tag covers the object; you should decide under what license you'd like to release the photo (PD, GFDL, CC-whatever) and add the appropriate tag/indication to the image description page. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

If that's all that's needed, the image is public domain. I've added the PD-Self tag. - Tim1965 (talk) 21:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad you two understand how an image can have two different type licenses, because I don't ;-) Glad it worked out.PumpkinSky talk 21:18, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Great. The image might still be challenged as to whether a fair-use image is required at all, but as you say you're prepared to defend it, we'll cross that bridge if we come to it. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• If it can be moved to Commons, I'm all for it. - Tim1965 (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• Unfortunately it can't unless we can demonstrate that the brooch design is not copyright-protected - Commons doesn't allow fair-use images. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:11, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll fight the fight for keeping it -- a single fair use image usually passes FA, and in this case, it's the only image we have of a Yogo in a setting, it's a famous piece that contributes to the article, not a photo of the entire brooch, etc. I'm not too worried so long as we have a fair and reasonable reviewer who isn't doing his/her first FAR. Montanabw^(talk) 15:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Yogo status

Are any further improvements needed to Yogo sapphire? PumpkinSky talk 22:26, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Louis Brownlow - Thanks for editing!

I appreciate your work on the Louis Brownlow article. Based on the revision history statistics and on a comparison of the article before and after your edits in April 2010‎, it's clear that you are primarily responsible for the article's high quality. You appropriately deleted some of the old text, you wrote informative new passages in a clear style, and you provided at least one reliable reference for almost every sentence. Thanks! -RichardKPSun (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Civil War Unknowns Monument

Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:02, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Yogo PR draft

See User:Wehwalt/Sandbox6 PumpkinSky talk 22:39, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Butt-Millet Memorial Fountain

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

unreferenced means no references, not poorly referenced

Hi there, I saw that you marked Craig Stott as being unreferenced. Only articles that are completely unreferenced should have {{BLP unsourced}}, if there is a

source (regardless of whether it is
properly formated or in an external
link) then other tags such as {{BLP sources}}, {{[[Template:no
footnotes|no
footnotes]]}}, {{primary sources}} or
other specific cleanup tags such as the IMdb specific tag that was on the article, should be used as appropriate.

Regards, The-Pope (talk) 00:42, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Yogo FAC image challenge

Your license on the brooch is being challenged at the Yogo FAC, which I listed yesterday, see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yogo sapphire/archive1. You said before you could defend the license. There's also a question of the 4 old image but on Commons it says "Works created but not published before January 1, 1978 are protected for 95 years from the date they were registered for copyright, or 95 (for anonymous or pseudonymous works)". As these are anon works, it'd seem to me at least the first two are PD due to them being over 95 years old, possibly the other two. PumpkinSky talk 15:25, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Given the discussion on the FAC page, do you feel it's okay for you, as the uploader to change the license to just one? PumpkinSky talk 21:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

PD? PumpkinSky talk 14:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

• Let's give people a chance to respond to your comment on the FA Talk page (it's Sunday; heck, even I'm just waking up! lol!), and see what they say. For pity's sake, I'm about to contact the authors themselves and see if they will disavow copyright just to get this settled! - Tim1965 (talk) 14:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

OK. Yea, it needs settled. I'm frustrated no one has answered on the media page I asked about this on. Maybe it's an extra tough nut.PumpkinSky talk 16:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

That or we just have a fussy FA reviewer who doesn't understand image copyright. Wish there was someone we know who could weigh in -- at least, someone trusted. Montanabw^(talk) 20:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Tim see Talk:Yogo_sapphire#Lookee_here.21, MTBW found a free image of the Tiffany brooch.PumpkinSky talk 20:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

LOL! Well, I also think that we do have that. I think resolving the issue with the Conchita butterfly would allow us to photograph a lot of jewelry. - Tim1965 (talk) 20:55, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but the problem is no one who knows images well is "ruling" on it.PumpkinSky talk 20:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Maybe the folks at commons might have some insights on the free image angle. Montanabw^(talk) 21:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I just posted there at [1] and hope we can get resolution. - Tim1965 (talk) 21:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Responses already, looks good.PumpkinSky talk 09:56, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Carl says we're good with the photo of the Yogo and part of the jewelry piece. We may or may not want to crop it some. Let's roll. Tim, would you like to take care of this? if not I will, but first defer to you. You may want to move to Commons and provide diffs/permanent links to Carl's thread.PumpkinSky talk 21:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

It's cropped and up on Commons: File:Detail - Conchita Sapphire Butterfly head with Yogo sapphire crop - 2011-01-07.jpg- Tim1965 (talk) 00:00, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Cool. Are you going to rm the FU tag on the original and then move it to commons? I put the new one in the article and will update the FAC. PumpkinSky talk 00:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it's better to do a speedy-delete on the Fair Use image, with the explanation that a cropped non-copyrightable version is on Commons. - Tim1965 (talk) 00:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

OK. You're the best one to take care of that. PumpkinSky talk 00:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The Ghost Ship

Working on getting this up to GA. you appear to have the Fearing the Dark book. Can you check the page numbers are correct? I may need your assitance in finding page numbers of a few of the source. If I can't find them I may replace the sources with verifiable ones in google books.

Coyle, William. Aspects of Fantasy: Selected Essays From the Second International Conference on the Fantastic in Literature and Film, 1986. Do you have the page for the source?

Are you positive it is public domain though? The copyright was renewed in 1971. [2] ♦ Dr. Blofeld 05:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

This is the source you used] to claim it is PD. Do you have the page number? Google book search isn't picking up "The Ghost Ship".♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

• Page 97 for the Coyle book. - Tim1965 (talk) 23:53, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

• I don't have access to the Film Superlist any more, as that was interlibrary loan. I'd need two to three weeks to get it again, if it is available. - Tim1965 (talk) 17:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For your outstanding support and dedication in getting Yogo sapphire from a new article to DYK to GA to FA and FOUR. The team effort of the uncountable people involved in getting this unique article to FA is a textbook case of teamwork in article improvement, ie, what Wikipedia should be, not what it all too often is. I can never thank everyone enough. PumpkinSky talk 23:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

• NO WAY! You did soooooooooooooooooooooooooo much more work than I did! There's no way I can take credit for any tinkering at the edges I did. - Tim1965 (talk) 01:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but you went clear over to the Smithsonian to get your pics, I only had to walk a block up the street for mine! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 17:17, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Basically, I took the bus "all the way over" to the Smithsonian. LOL! Then I walked six blocks north and went to the movies in Chinatown. One thing I did learn: If you want to take photos in the Smithsonian with a tripod or monopod, you have to ask permission. It takes weeks to get that. Taking them by hand is hard... - Tim1965 (talk) 00:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

You helped Tim, and it's deeply appreciated. PumpkinSky talk 00:12, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

United Medical Center

Hey Tim. I recently saw that you created a page in your sandbox for United Medical Center. Would you be interested in cleaning it up and moving it into the mainspace, as it would be an awesome addition to the site. I look forward to your opinion. Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)