User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2017/December

You removed images on my account!

Why should you do that— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rileybooboo1 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)‎

@Rileybooboo1: I explained why in the edit sum I left here, but basically it has to do with licensing of the file you were trying to use. The licensing of each media file you see used on Wikipedia is determined by it copyright status and not every file you see on Wikipedia is licensed the same. Some files are licensed as public domain or licensed under a free licensed suitable for Wikipedia, and these are often collectively referred to as "free images". Other files are licensed as non-free content because of their copyright status, and these files are commonly referred to as "non-free".

Non-free content use on Wikipedia is highly restricted and each use of such files must satisfy Wikipedia's non-free image use policy. I removed File:Sonicchannel_tails_cg.png because it is a non-free file, which means it is only allowed to be used in the article namespace per Wikipedia non-free content use criterion #9; this means no user pages or user subpages per WP:UP#Non-free files. Moreover, non-free content is not allowed to be used in userboxes per WP:UBX#Caution about image use.

If you have any other questions about non-free file use, please feel free to ask them here, at WP:MCQ or WT:NFC. If you have any general questions about Wikipedia, you can also ask them here, but you might also want to try asking for assistance at The Teahouse. Finally, please try and remember to always sign your talk page posts. The easiest way to sign a post is explained in WP:TILDE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:42, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Marchjuly. 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)

image for book cover?

Hello, I noticed that you removed my image of a book cover for "The Heart," which I am currently writing an article for. I read on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Books/Images#Book_covers that I could use a non-free book cover...or am I mistaken? Could you please explain how I would be able to add a book cover properly without violating any copyright policies? Thank you.

Mp0217 (talk) 18:49, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Mp0217. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy does allow non-free book covers, and other items listed in item 1 of WP:NFCI to be used in articles, but the key point is tthat the file is being used in an "article": on Wikipedia, an "article" is something found within the article namespace. The problem, as I explained in this edit sum when I removed the file, is that you were using the file in a userspace draft which is not allowed per WP:NFCC#9 and WP:UP#Non-free files. There are ten non-free content criteria which need to be satisfied each time a non-free file is used on Wikipedia, and one of these criteria in NFCC#9. This limits non-free content use to only articles, which means no templates, drafts, talk pages, or anything found in the user namespace, etc. So, a non-free file cannot be used in User:Mp0217/The Heart (novel). If someday the draft your working on gets approved and moved to the article namespace, then using the file would probably OK as longer as there are no other non-free content issues besides NFCC#9.

All non-free files are required to be used in at least one article per WP:NFCC#7. Those which aren't will eventually be tagged for speedy deletion per WP:F5. If this happens to this file, don't panic and re-upload the file. Deleted files aren't really gone forever, but rather are only hidden from public view. A deleted file, particularly a no-free one deleted for being an orphan, can be "undeleted" by an administrator either by direct request or via WP:REFUND. As long as there are no other issue with the file's licensing, etc., this type of undeletion is usually considered to be uncontentious. For future reference, having a book cover in the infobox is a nice touch, but it will not (or at least should not) affect whether a draft is accepted as an article. That will be determined by WP:GNG or WP:NBOOK, so in general it's better to wait until the sraft has been accepted before uploading any non-free images to use in the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Drama

Hu He continues his drama. He have not the right to propose a sanction. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:41, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

@Panam2014: Everyone one technically has the "right" to pretty much do anything they want on Wikipedia, but whether they really should be doing such a thing is a different question. For example, your could and did refactor the other editor's talk page post with this edit, but it was not an appropriate thing to do. My advice to you is to go back a revert your edit or re-add the heading because if you don't it could lead to an administrator deciding to take action against you. ANI threads are for proposing/discussing such things, and adminsitrators will simply ignore any proposal they feel has no basis. They might even warn the other person to stop making them; but, your editing of the other editor's post without a really good policy-based reason for doing so means that they might warn you too. I warned the other editor about editing your posts, so it's going to seem even worse that you then later decided to go and edit one of theirs.

My suggestion to you about the ANI thread would be just to stop responding to this editor, go back to editing articles, and let the ANI run its course. The ANI thread will eventually be closed by an administrator who will decide what, if anything, needs to be done. Wikipedia is not a battleground and the way you two going back and forth does not reflect favorably on either of you. If the other editor wants to keep adding fuel to the fire, then don't take the bait and respond in turn. If they want to keep pointing their figure at others, it will eventually WP:BOOMERANG on them. On the other hand, if you maybe could've made a mistake (even if it was an accident), then acknowledge the mistake and explain what you intend to do to avoid repeating it again.

Your constant pinging of NuclearWizard in your posts might have irritated them to the point that they has decided not to respond; one ping is enough and NuclerWizard has been notified of the ANI discussion on their user talk. Moreover, this constant pinging might also be making some others a little less sympathetic to your position and a little less willing to get involved. "Drama" often needs multiple parties to be continue, so just step back for awhile and let the other editor have the ANI stage all to themselves. Adminstrators reviewing the thread will check all that has been posted both at ANI and other pages and figure out how best to deal with it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:18, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. The problem is that its provocative title is misleading. He proclaims himself judge and party, and also only an administrator has the right to propose a sanction. A contributor does not have the right to do so, especially if it is part of the conflict. We can not let him do that and anyway my action is justified, a contributor does not have the right to write anything. In addition, only an admin has the right to create a subsection of an "ANI". The current subsection results from the merger of a director of the two "ANI". Or the solution is to write to an administrator and show him his actions? But which one? Or could you tell this contributor not to behave like an admin. Best regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 22:26, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Anyone can create a subsection at an ANI, so you're incorrect on that point. You're also incorrect when you say "only an administrator can propose a sanction"; anyone can request that an administrator take action, but only an administrator can take action. In addition, anyone can participate in an AfD and you refactoring of the other editor's comment was just plain wrong and not justified at all. As I suggested above, your best course of action is to disengage and leave the matter for an adminstrator to resolve. You should stop trying to "stop him" and simply let others assessed what has been written so far and try and figure out what to do. You should also be really careful about posting on various other pages and asking for others to intervene on your behalf because it could be seen as WP:FORUMSHOP or WP:CANVASS. The ANI thread has been started and it will be eventually closed by an administrator, so you should simply wait it out and see what happens. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

But a contributor could ask for a sanction, but he couldn't propose a sanction against a contradictor. --Panam2014 (talk) 12:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Anyone participating in an ANI thread can ask/suggest/propose that some action be taken, but only an administrator can actually take such an action. So, Chilicheese22 can make all the proposals they want; if the proposals are not helpful, an adminstrator will warn them about doing such a thing. Anyway, as I expected, some administrators have posted comments in the thread and provided suggestions on possible ways to resolve this dispute. In particular, Ivanvector gave you some good advice, which I suggest you take. Administrators have been chosen by the community to watchover Wikipedia and make sure everything runs smoothly; they tend to only take action when it's needed to prevent any further disruption of the encyclopedia, not just to punish a particular editor. The back-and-forth between you and Chilicheese22 is starting to get disruptive, so administrators will take action against the both of you if that's what they feel needs to be done. That's why my advice to you is still the same as before, you should take a step back, let things cool down, and let the DRN discussion you started run its course. If you keep fanning the flames at ANI by responding to every post made by Chilicheese22 or go back to refactoring their posts, I'm afraid you're going to find that the administrators now watching the thread are going to be inclined to take action against you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:19, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Logo usage

Thank you for your edit. I changed the logo for the good one. – kgyt (talk) 00:27, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Can I ask a question? The logo is the Member logo. Why I cannot use this? “If using the logo on […] a website […], it is appropriate only if accompanied by the text "Mensa member." Please reference American Mensa's name and logo policy for additional guidelines.” – kgyt (talk) 00:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

@Kgyt: All file's need to be provided with a copyright license or they can be deleted per WP:F4; moreover, only the original copyright holder (in this case Mensa International) can release the file under a free license. So, unless you are claiming that this file is your own original creation (not a derivative of someone else's work or something you just found online, downloaded, and then reuploaded to Wikipedia), you are going to need the have an explicit declaration of consent from Mensa to upload the file as anything other than non-free content. Moreover, if you upload the file as non-free content, it cannot be used in userboxes or on your userpage per WP:NFCC#9, WP:UP#Non-free files, and WP:UBX#Caution about image use.

For reference, a "free license" means a file is being released for download by anyone anywhere in the world for any purpose, including commerical purposes. Mensa might give it's members permission to use its logo under certain conditions, but a Mensa member cannot upload the file to Wikipedia under a free license unless Mensa is willing to let anyone (including non-members) use the file for any purpose; moreover, a free license which places any retrictions on commercial use, derivative works, or states " for Wikipedia use only" is not acceptable per WP:COPY or c:COM:L. Once a file has been released under a free license, the licensed cannot be revoked or canceled at a later date if the original copyright holder changes it's mind, so you need to be very careful with uploading copyrighted content created by others. You should take a look at c:COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder if you want to ask Mensa to release this file under a free license. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. I will try other solutions… ;) Have a nice day. – kgyt (talk) 01:00, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

It seems you that since I started my last post, you have added a non-free copyright license and corresponding non-free use rationale to the file's page. However, non-free content can only be used in the article namespace, so even though the file's use in Mensa International may be permissable, you cannot use the file in User:Kgyt/Userboxes/Mensan per [Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. Mensa may say otherwise on their website, and other websites may allow such images to be used per fair use, but Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is much more restrictive than fair use, and satisfying Wikipedia's policy in this case is what matters. You can ask others for feedback at WP:MCQ or WT:NFC if you like, but you'll most likely be told something similar. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

No problem. It’s ok. – kgyt (talk) 01:09, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood some of what I've posted or I didn't doing a very good job explaining things. You can use that logo on Wikipedia, just in your user namespace. For example, if what you uploaded is a newer version of Mensa's logo, then you can replace the one currently used in the Mensa article with it. That would be an acceptable use of a non-free logo. What to do with the older version is a different non-free issue, but using non-free logos in main infoboxes as the primary means of identification is a type of non-free use which is generally considered acceptable. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

? Yes, I don’t understand you now. :) You wrote, “[…] you cannot use the file […]” and “[…] but Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is much more restrictive than fair use […]”. If I cannot use, I don’t use. No problem. – kgyt (talk) 01:39, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

This new logo is not the official logo of Mensa, this is the Mensa Member logo. This logo is irrelevant out of user namespace and if Wikipedia’s use policy disallow non-free images in user namespace… I think the file has to be deleted. – kgyt (talk) 01:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

This file is deleted now. I am not sad. It’s ok, and I respect for your work. – kgyt (talk) 01:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Edit warring on Computer shogi

Your recent editing history at Computer shogi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Quantanew (talk • contribs) 14:25, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

WP:WPSCH

Hi! Hey, thanks for the respect and confidence, but the school project predates my time here. I started in February of 12 (I made my first Wikipedia edit waiting for my son to be born. Remembering that is easy). I've only been one of the coordinators of WPSCH for about two years. There were three coordinators when I started, but two have left leaving just myself and Kudpung, who may have been one of the founders. I'm not at all clear on the history. I primarily look after the US schools, with some attention paid to Canada, but Meters watches Canada closer than I do. Kudpung watches British schools, WhisperToMe pays pretty close attention to the East Asian area, along with working hard on selected regions of the US. Kudpung has far flung businesses to manage, besides a very active meta roll in Wikipedia, I work on my local political causes and my church ministries and raise my son. In short, we could use a systems kind of guy to help. Would that interest you? John from Idegon (talk) 03:15, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure what a "systems guy" is, and I'm not sure how much help I would be. I tend to just be an uber-gnome, flipping through articles looking for issues that I might be able to correct. Other than non-free content and maybe shogi stuff, I don't really stick in one area for too long. If you need any gnomish-type cleanup, then I don't mind. I don't use bots or scripts though, so manually cleaning up tons of articles will take a bit of time. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:22, 8 Declcember 2017 (UTC)

I'm looking for a person with good organizational skills (someone who can figure out how to make things work - that's what I see a "systems guy" as). If that's not you, I apologise. I figured working at FFD was an area that required that. It's pretty complicated. Even tho I have a better than average understanding of copyright due to many years of selling my own photos, I'm not comfortable with FFD. There are a gazillion tasks that need to get moved forward in WPSCH, and no clear way to develop any plan or methodology to make it happen. From my interactions with you, you seem like someone who could help. Consider it please. I'd like to brainstorm some real goals, but I don't even see a good way to make that happen. Perhaps some of the people I pinged can chime in and we can figure it out. If you don't want this on your talk, just say so. I don't think your really giving yourself enough credit. You offer a lot to the community. John from Idegon (talk) 06:02, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

There is an indispensable tool, the Alert Bot, which leaves an entry in your watchlist with a list of all tagging, AfD, PROD, etc., and other meta issues with all school articles. The WPSCH project was created in 2004 by Davodd who has not been very active on Wikipedia for a very long time. CT Cooper managed the project for several years until 2013, and I joined the project in 2010. Tedder will make admin interventions in cases when I am involved after having already made reverts, protected pages, or blocked users. When Chris Cooper retired, I was left holding there baby for a while until I saw the excellent work John was doing so I asked him to on board. We do our best but due to our other commitments, the schools project is very much under staffed. It only really needs subscribing to the bot and keeping all the project pages on one's watchlist. There's something to be done every day even if its just reverting vandalism, which being a school project, it is rather open to, but also occasional spam from for-profit schools. There is occasional tendentious editing on some school articles that needs to be nipped in the bud, and when things get critical it's probably quicker to get me to protect pages and block accounts than wait for some intervention at AIV or RFPP - vandals are often on a spree. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: I'm happy to help wherever/whenever I can. I just tend to do things manually, so it sometimes takes lots of edits/time to get through a particular task. This means I'm well-versed in some of the more technical aspects of Wikipedia, etc. which is why I'm always relying on the kindness of strangers for that kind of thing. You can post here if you want. I figure people how post things here probably don't care if others know what's being discussed. As long as it's not a violation of any policy or guideline, I won't remove it and I will always respond if necessary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:13, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Kudpung: I'm not sure how much help I'd be with the TE and spam stuff, but minor fixes or reverting blatant vandalism would be stuff that I normally do when I come across. I am also leery about promising to commit to something full-time so to speak and then not being able to do so. Right now, I do edit a lot (probably more than I should), but that might not always be the case. That's one reason I really haven't requested any additional user rights or the ability to use certain scripts because I'm not sure I'd use them enough to make it worth Wikipedia's wild. As I posted above, I tend to butterfly my way from random article to random article by playing follow the link to see if there's something to clean up. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:19, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I looked at the AlertBot page and I get the general idea, but not sure how or what I need to do there. Do I somehow subscribe to it by adding my username to a list? -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

All you need do is add Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article alerts to your watchlist. A bot runs every night and updates it (it runs around 2am MST), at which time it will appear on your watchlist. John from Idegon (talk) 16:04, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification John. Added it the list. Not sure what I should be looking exactly though, but I'll give it a watch. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI

Can you just add you comment without duplicating 300K of ANI with the comment? Thanks, Acroterion (talk) 03:08, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@Acroterion: Sorry about that. There was an edit conflict and I mistakenly copied-and-pasted more than my comment back into the thread. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

No problem, it was clear that you didn't intend to do that. Acroterion (talk) 04:02, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Was rushing out to eat lunch so I wasn't as careful as I should've been. [[File:|25px|link=]] -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:05, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

Hiroyuki Miura (shogi) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Akira Watanabe

Nobuyuki Yashiki (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Yoshikazu Minami

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Army Navy Screen Magazine

Could you take another look at the link you removed from Bazooka (instrument)? My impression was that Army-Navy Screen Magazine was a US government release (using Hollywood talent), and therefore PD? The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 14:22, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that's my understanding too, so I've restored the link. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:37, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I didn't realize it was a "video magazine" so to speak and thought it was some footage someone just found somewhere and uploaded. My bad. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:07, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Your response was WONDERFUL

...on User talk:108.173.125.11, which I randomly stumbled over. Earnestness is my favorite virtue, and your response was overflowing with it. I also really liked what you said about the IP user having the potential to become a good contributing editor.

Sometimes people lose sight of that fact, usually through troll-based exhaustion, and we lose either people who are established editors have done a lot of good things over the years, or newbies who could be a source of many good things over the years to come. The lack of deescalation efforts in particular is a problem. That's why I appreciated yours to the point that, even after I clicked Thank, I still decided to come over here and leave this comment.

And OH WOW YOU LIVE IN JAPAN! Jealous!

Take care of yourself first so you don't burn out! We need you here. —Geekdiva (talk) 21:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment. I don't remember exactly why I actually made that post, but perhaps there was something about the edit-in-question that made me think it might be worth a shot. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:43, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kathryn Tappen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NHL Network (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.)

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

NEW JANE BOYD ARTICLE

Thanks for guidance on free use images and other edits you made to my first Wiki article Jane Boyd - helpful in learning the Wiki approach (long way to go, I know). I've been in contact with the artist to explain the complexity of non-free use. She’s uploaded a different image to WikiCommons and I’ve included it today in the infobox. I’d be glad of your further advice if I’m still getting this wrong.

Working on finding refs to replace citation needed tags, I've sourced some, I hope acceptably. I’m trying to gauge acceptability and where I draw a blank I'm removing statements that have been tagged, particularly in Awards. Securing corroboration for these can be a problem as some are additionally supported by media or self-published comment only and several predate online listing. All are cited on the artist’s website however. According to WP:BLPSELFPUB Using the subject as a self-published source it seems this might be acceptable for citation. Am I misreading the advice?

Anaglyph (talk) 18:53, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@Anaglyph: I'm not sure about the photo. France is very tricky when it comes to photos because there is very limited "freedom of panorama" under French copyright law as explained in c:COM:FOP#France. Many images which of buildings, etc. which would be accepted by Wikimedia Commons if taken in the United States have been deleted for this reason. Now, I'm not sure if that particular file is OK for Commons to keep, so I will ask about it at c:COM:VP/C#File:TOPWIKICO B291046 copy.tiff. As for the image itself, if its licensing is not an issue than it might be better to move it from the main infobox to the body of the article where it is being discussed. The main infobox would be a better suited for an image of Ms. Boyd herself. Since since uploading photos to Commons, perhaps you can ask her if she holds the copyright on any photos she has had taken of her, or if she can take a selfie. Anything taken of her by a professional photographer for a website, etc. will probably need the photograher's permission, but anything she takens of herself (selfie, using timer, etc.) can be uploaded as "own work". She just needs to make sure she's uploads the original data (i.e., digital file) if at all possible and not something she downloaded from a website.

As for WP:BLPSELFPUB, individuals can be used as sources for content about themselves in some cases, but it can't be anything too self-serving. Care needs to be taken since it is a primary source and primary sources are not appropriate in some cases. You can be WP:BOLD and add such a source, but you should follow WP:BRD if the source is challenged or removed. If you're not sure, you might want to ask about the source first on the article's talk page or at WP:BLPN.

Finally, I haven't mentioned this until now, but since you've been in contact with Ms. Boyd, you need to be aware of WP:COI. Even an WP:APPARENTCOI can sometime create issues with other editors. So, read WP:PSCOI and if any of what's written on that page applies to you, please adjust your editing accordingly. COI editing is not expressly prohibited, but it's something highly discouraged. If this applies to you and Ms. Boyd, then you should be aware of the relevant guidelines and adhere to them; if this doesn't apply to you, then the COI pages still contain lots of information that you may find helpful in other ways. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:00, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your detailed and helpful response. On the photo, I accept your reasons for moving it from the infobox (and I see that you’ve made this move. Good).

I’d rather not contact Ms Boyd again on the subject of providing an image of herself, since I want to avoid any sense of apparent conflict of interest (see my response below to your comments on this). There are images of Ms Boyd on the web but not in the public domain, as far as I have discovered. If she or others wish to place them in the public domain, all to the good, but I’ll keep out of it.

On the French licensing question, the artist claims copyright for the photo (see her website - 'Unless otherwise stated all photographs on this website and content thereof are Copyright © 1992-2017 Jane Boyd’) and it's of her own work, which is sited in a private building. This appears a sound basis for accepting that the image is properly in the public domain.

I had already read up on the COI advice because I had worked with this artist on website design. I am not a fine artist and have no professional axe to grind, but I was surprised no one had created a wikipedia page covering her work. From the independent reliable sources cited (eg collected by the V&A and British Museum) it seems to me she can be regarded as a notable and interesting artist.

I am greatly supportive of the Wikipedia ethos and aims, and make annual donations. I have a professional interest in software creation and want actively to help out with the work of editing. I registered as a user some years ago and did a little editing here and there. I decided the time had come for me to create an article. I reasoned that if I outlined Boyd's career and works, others knowledgeable about living British artists would embellish the article and experienced Wikipedia editors would correct and polish its presentation.

I trust that this process is now underway. I'll remove a couple of lines where I have not been able to find supporting evidence (predating online listing) and will boldly accept her claim to be an RSA fellow. If someone decides to remove this I’ll leave it to others to substantiate - though from my researches I’m aware that confirmation can only be requested by an RSA member (which I am not) and that nevertheless there are over 500 Wikipedia subjects for whom this claim is made.

Having made those changes I’ll leave the Boyd article for others to develop.

Once again, thanks for your advice which has helped me on the way to becoming a halfway decent WP editor. How long the second half will take is anyone’s guess. Happy holidays! -- Anaglyph (talk) 18:55, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Seasons' Greetings to you as well FWiW Bzuk -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:46, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Image

This is non-free image? File:ChippendalesLasVegas.jpg Music Video 123 (talk) 15:39, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

It looks like a personal photo that someone took and then uploaded to Flickr under a {{cc-by-sa-2.0}}. So, it's does not seem to be a non-free image unless you are feel that this is a case of Flickr washing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC)