User talk:Apdamegriff

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Apdame, and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears you are a course instructor leading a class project.

New to Wikipedia or want to learn about best practices for Wikipedia assignments?

Go through our online training for educators.

The training includes instructions for setting up a structured course page, with tools for tracking student work and encouraging peer review. Please also see this helpful advice for instructors.

If you run into problems or want some feedback on your Wikipedia assignment plans, try posting to the education noticeboard.

We hope you like it here and encourage you to stay after your assignment is finished! Valfontis (talk) 19:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Course instructor[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I've added the course instructor right to your account, so you're all set to add your course page to the system.--ragesoss (talk) 18:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WMST 250: Women, Art, and Culture (2014 Q3)[edit]

Hello,

I thought I'd touch base with you. I've been working on reviews of each of the student's articles and am about half-way through the list, with Adam (Wiki Ed)'s guidance. I'm keeping track of the reviews in a table on this page.

A couple of comments / questions:

There is a range in student's writing quality, article size, and technical proficiency. Most are doing a great job! I like how many are not just providing details about the women's career, but are also providing insight into their character and motivation.
There are several people who have tried unsuccessfully to load images - and they are declined for lack of documentation. For authors, I have suggested that they may want to load a plain book cover image under {{PD-simple}}, particularly if I've seen them attempt to load an image. For artists, a single image of their work can be loaded under fair use, but the key issue in loading it into Wikipedia (not commons for fair use) and justifying that it is being used as a representation of the artist's work, the user has been unable to find images in the public domain, and no other images are going to be loaded onto the page. If it would be helpful, I can put together a short explanation of how to successfully upload a "fair use" image, particularly regarding the justification. Let me know if this would be helpful.
There are some users who are using the subject's website as a source for information about their works - and, in at least one case, their careers. I believe that in each of a handful of cases so far, I've said it may not be an issue for list of works that would be easily verifiable, but would be a bigger issues for article content - particularly if it's a main source for biographies of living people. Is it a concern whether the student's use the subject's website as a source?
I have found two cases so far where an article has been started in article space that is either 1) used as a starting point for the article draft or 2) a completely different draft / sources. (Sort on last column of the table to get these to rise to the top). Would you want help integrating / merging the sandbox articles into those in article space? Or, would that be the student's responsibility?

As an FYI, I am also making minor edits to clean-up content to make them article-ready per standard practices (how birth/death info is shown in the intro, examples of using italics for works, minor punctuation issues, tweaking section headings so that the second+ words are not capitalized, unless they are proper nouns) + adding {{Authority control}} values (e.g., Library of Congress, World Cat, VIAF, etc.) and a starting set of categories of the subjects of the articles. Generally, these are things that are Wikipedia standard / minor formatting issues. Comments are posted on the sandbox talk pages for each review.

It seems like a very interesting class - and a great set of students!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just a few comments here. I think using the artist's website for some claims is fine, but as Carole notes we should try not to rely on it too heavily. Part of this is the issue that BLPs should have strong sourcing but it's largely (as the claims from the subject's site will likely be pretty anodyne) to make sure the articles on living artists aren't seen by community members as too promotional. Often editors checking new pages or recent changes will quickly scan through edits and look for sources--seeing an article which relies on the subject's website will likely attract more scrutiny than would otherwise be warranted.

non-free (commonly though not entirely accurately called "fair use") images would be great for many of these articles, but they present a bit of a challenge as we have to justify the use on the page by finding a source which specifically comments on the work in question. This isn't that hard, but it's something that the student will have to work out before uploading the image. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:14, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For a somewhat heterodox example, see this portrait of Adam Smith (it's not in the public domain for quirky reasons). The image is included on the page because the medallion itself was the basis for many later portraits of Smith (and we have a source indicating so=). For most of your students it will be the case that a source comments directly on some facet of a work which can be best illustrated to a reader with an image, sound or video. That justification has to be part of the "fair use rationale". Adam (Wiki Ed) 15:30, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CaroleHenson and Adam (Wiki Ed): Thanks to both of you - sorry for not getting back to y'all until now. CaroleHenson, any explanation you could offer regarding fair use images would be great. I'll also point back to your comments as well, Adam (Wiki Ed). Even if the original article authors don't find images, it can be something for their peers to do for Assignment #4. As to personal sites and sources, given how little information was available on some individuals, I've allowed it. I'll inform students about the concern, and let them know that it may come up after the articles are published and publicly available. Lastly, help regarding integration would be great. I'd hope to leave the actual work of integrating it up to the students, so they feel it's really something they can "own" as their page. However, guidance and suggestions on how to make that as smooth as possible would be incredibly helpful. Lastly, I mentioned this in an email to Adam (Wiki Ed), but I wanted to thank both of you again for all of your help. I was really worried this assignment might not pan out, as no one I'm familiar with at my university has really tried something like this project on this scale, but you've both helped immensely. As such, I think I'll likely be repeating a updated version of this assignment, possibly using the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists/Worklist, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers/Missing articles, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's History/Requested articles as possible sources of subjects. Apdame (talk) 02:45, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to sourcing, I've tried to suggest sources where I've found them (see here for an example). For subjects where a web search doesn't reveal much, adding these sources to the article (even if they're not used as inline citations for particular claims) is valuable because editors reviewing these articles will unfortunately not always conduct exhaustive searches. From a sunnier standpoint, adding "general" sources helps future editors looking to improve the page by offering low hanging fruit for improvement. If our article on a particular artist relies on 4 sources for the inline citations but notes 3 others at the bottom someone can come along and integrate them fairly easily. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:10, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Catalina Parra[edit]

Hi, I removed Artist Catalina Parra, which is now deleted, from the "article" column for User:Clavaden on the Women, Art, and Culture page. There was also a copy of the article with the correct name Catalina Parra, which I added into that place. But, the process kicked out your "reviewer" addition. Sorry about that! Do you mind adding yourself as a user again? Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:52, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CaroleHenson: No problem! I added myself to show the students how to do it, so I'll re-add myself now.

Non-free image[edit]

@Apdame and Adam (Wiki Ed): Here's my stab at a write-up for loading a non-free image of a work by an artist - based upon the steps I've used in the past:

Summary for loading a non-free image to Wikipedia

1. Read policy for non-free content, which will help you evaluate whether the image can be used... and help to complete the fair-use rationale.

2. Obtain a copy of an image that is described in the article as an important work by the artist, which will be displayed with low resolution (e.g., generally less than 400 pixels - "thumb"s default to 250, so as long as you don't override the "thumb" setting for the image, you should be good)

3. Load the image to Wikipedia using the upload wizard

4. Use a tag to indicate the type of non-free image that is being uploaded under the licensing criteria.

{{Non-free 2D art}}—for low resolution images of two dimensional works of art under copyright.
{{Non-free 3D art}}—for images of three-dimensional works of art that are still under copyright.

5. Complete non-free use rationale, like:

Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:

1. This is a historically significant work that could not be conveyed in words.

2. Inclusion is for information, education, and analysis only.

3. Its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because it shows a major type of work produced by the artist.

4. The image is a low resolution copy of the original work and would be unlikely to impact sales of prints or be usable as a desktop backdrop.

5. It is not replaceable with an uncopyrighted or freely copyrighted image of comparable educational value.

6. It will be the only non-free image used in the article

6. When the image is successfully loaded and ready to add the the article, I add a comment before the file information ( [[File:<filename>|thumb|<caption>]] ) in the article:

I'm not sure where this should be posted... and thought it would be good to have Adam looks it over to ensure it's copacetic.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:30, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CaroleHenson: I'm going over this today in class, and I'll also post it on their class mainspace off Wikipedia, where they're more likely to read and use it.

Copyright violation[edit]

Apdame and Adam (Wiki Ed)

The Mako Idemitsu article containted copyright violations from two sources - one of which was the artist's website and the other was from content taken from a biography on CLARA website. There are a couple of articles that have already been identified as copyright violation concerns for drafts in user's sandboxes in the table on this page that Adam and I have been updating as we've reviewed articles.

I'm going to meticulously check each of the course's articles posted to article space right now - and then go through drafts in the student's standbox. You may want to report the importance of paraphrasing content and that articles with copyright violations will be deleted.

In terms of the article about Idemitsu, I recommended that the student make changes in the sandbox page, which can be checked before they're moved to article space. Make sense?--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:36, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CaroleHenson: Can do. I've spoken to them multiple times, as well as left comments on their grades, but I will remind them yet again about making sure their work is either summary or quotations.

Great, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:46, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Really great activity today - and I've been impressed by student's reviews - and it seems like a good idea to see how that process impacts the articles before I step in with further comments (let me know if you have additional thoughts about this, though). I think I checked all the articles in article space for copyvio/CP now - and will continue with others after the flurry quiets down. It's great to see the article improvement and review activity! Great class!--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:16, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Change in your user rights[edit]

Your Wikipedia account was previously granted a user right called "course instructor" by the Wiki Education Foundation. That right enabled you to create a course page through the EducationProgram MediaWiki extension. Starting in fall 2015, the Wiki Education Foundation has discontinued its use of this extension. Going forward, users should create course pages through the Wiki Education Foundation website. That application is more user-friendly, and any content is automatically mirrored to Wikipedia. To prevent confusion, we'll be removing your "course instructor" user right, as it is not needed with the new system. This is simply a notification of the technical change to your account. No action is needed from you at this time.

If you plan on teaching with Wikipedia for the fall 2015 term, please email me (helainewikiedu.org) for instructions how to create your next course page using our new system. --Helaine (Wiki Ed) (talk), sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: FTM International has been accepted[edit]

FTM International, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Nightenbelle (talk) 14:13, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]