User talk:PBI-jeff

Orphaned non-free image File:RVIC Bible Cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RVIC Bible Cover.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) 17:26, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:RVIC Bible cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RVIC Bible cover.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) 17:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Conflict of interest editing

Hello, PBI-jeff. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Revised Version Improved and Corrected (RVIC), 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 organizations 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 {{request edit}} template);
• 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, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:46, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi PBI-jeff. Given that you seem to be claiming that you're a director of Pastoral Bible Institute, you most certainly are going to be considered to have a conflict of interest with respect to any content you try to edit or create about PBI on Wikipedia. Moreover, you position as a director almost most likely means you're going to need to comply with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure with respect to any content you edit or create about the PBI. I strongly suggest that you take the time to read through the pages linked to above and make sure you comply with them before trying to edi or create any more content about the PBI. Please understand that undisclosed compensated editing (in this context "compensated" is defined rather broadly and is not necessarily limited to direct monetary compensation (i.e. a salary)) is violation of the Wikimedia Foundation's meta:Terms of Use and could lead to an immeediate blocking of your account by a Wikipedia administrator if continued. It's OK if you didn't know any of this and meant no harm, but please take steps to properly declare you connection to the PBI now that you do. If you have any questions about this, you can ask them below using Template:Admin help or by seeking assistance at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello MarchJuly, I am trying to follow your suggestion to tag the uploaded 2D photo as PD-Scan (I don't understand why you suggested PD-Scan-two) but the automatic bot still says I don't have enough information after I updated and published it. I may not have used the correct tag format when I uploaded it originally. Also, I don't know how to "remove the deletion template." Here is the simple 2D file I uploaded to the commons: File:RVIC Optimized for web.jpg. It was emailed to me by the person identified who took the photo. I don't understand why its so complicated to use a simple photo. Thanks for any help. PBI-jeff (talk) 05:30, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The bot tagged the file for not having a copyright license because you didn't add one when you uploaded the file. You subsequently added a license which means it should be OK. The problem seems to have been the result of you adding c:Template:PD-Scan-two as the syntax for the license instead of {{PD-Scan-two}}. c:Template:PD-Scan-two is just a link to the template's documentation page where you can find out how to use the template; so, basically you added a link to the template's page instead of the template itself. In hindsight, though, c:Template:PD-Scan was probably OK since the country of first publication is also the United States. Anyway, I will clean up the syntax of the template for you since you forgot to specify while the original cover is within the public domain in the US states. Finally, the |author= parameter in the file's description is (I believe) where you would enter the author of the bible. Is Tom Ruggirello the author of the bible? If not, then I don't think you should add his name there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:53, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

No, Tom Ruggirello is not the author of the RVIC Bible, it is James Parkinson. Should I add the |author= parameter to the PD-Scan tag? Or, do I add it to another tag? Also, I supposed I can go into the information for the photo to see how you "cleaned up the syntax"? I will next try to address the Conflict of interest for the RVIC article itself. Thanks for the help. PBI-jeff (talk) 14:11, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Assuming that Tom Ruggirello took the photo and you're not him, then things have gotten a bit more complicated. The reason why I suggested that you take the photo is that you could release "your work" as the uploader of the photo since you would also be the copyright holder of the photo. However, adding another person to equation makes things a bit more complicated because technically that person would be considered the copyright holder of the photo. In the US, this isn't really a problem; however, under the copyright laws of some countries like the UK, it could be a speed bump to anyone wanting to reuse the photo. After discussing this with a Commons administrator, I've change the file's licensing to c:Template:PD-Art for the photo and c:Template:PD-textlogo for the cover art. "PD-Scan" is technically better suited for photocopies or scans, whereas "PD-Art" works better for photos because some countries consider there to always be an element of creativity involved when taking a photo. Things should be OK now, unless whomever took the photo specifically stated they wanted it released under a particular copyright license. In that case, the wishes should be reflected and the licensing tweaked again, as long as they chose a free license accepted by Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Replaceable non-free use File:RVIC Bible cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:RVIC Bible cover.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

The same thing also applies to File:RVIC Bible Cover.jpg. Assuming that this bible was first published in the United States, its cover art is almost too simple to be eligible for copyright protection under US copyright law, which means there's really no need to treat the file you upload as non-free content for any reason other than the copyright status of the photo itself. That in and of itself isn't going to be a sufficient justification for non-free use because someone else could simply take a photo of the bible's cover and uploaded it under one of the free licenses accepted by Wikipedia. My suggestion to you would be to take a straight-on photo of the cover (just the cover without any discerning background) as explained in c:Commons:2D copying. If you do this, no new copyright will be generated for the photo itself and you could then upload it to Wikimedia Commons under a c:Template:PD-Scan-two license. Any photo of the bible's cover that has a 3D element to it or has potentially copyrightable elements in the background is likely going to be considered creative enough to generate a copyright for the photo itself and create a Wikipedia:Derivative work; such a thing isn't going to be considered a sufficient justification in and of itself for non-free use. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:RVIC Bible Cover.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:RVIC Bible Cover.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Revised Version Improved and Corrected (RVIC) (July 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Greenman were: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Revised Version Improved and Corrected (RVIC) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Greenman (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, PBI-jeff! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Greenman (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)