Jump to content

User talk:Rodolph/Archive3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 2014

[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to John Eugène, 8th Count de Salis-Soglio may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Croker)<ref>http://landedestates.nuigalway.ie/LandedEstates/jsp/property-show.jsp?id=2348</ref>): residence in the heart of County Limerick.]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:31, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sir John Dalling, 1st Baronet may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Dalling married secondly, in 1770, Louisa, (died 1824), daughter of Excelles Lawford]], of [[Burwood Park|Burwood]], Surrey. Their only surviving son [[Sir William Windham Dalling, 2nd

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:58, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to De Salis may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Salis-Soglio (1890–1968) of [https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Gem%C3%BCnden Schloss Gemünden]].

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:17, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Benyon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ockendon (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) 08:55, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:John, 9th Count de Salis, southern England, July 2011.jpg

[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:John, 9th Count de Salis, southern England, July 2011.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 12:46, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for File:McCoshFingaskDalek.jpg

[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:McCoshFingaskDalek.jpg. Because you uploaded the media originally, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You might also want to comment on some recent requests I made at WP:REFUND (see also User_talk:Sfan00_IMG#Requests_at_WP:REFUND where I suggested another contributor (or admin got in touch directly). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:31, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Further to that, thanks for the comments in the Deletion Review, if you find other media which was deleted (other than F8's-which means it got moved to Commons :) ) you can follow the instructions at the top of that page to request a review of the process, and where the material can be shown with a compelling but polite argument to be reasonable and compatible with Wikipedia's licensing and scope, it can be undelted, information added, and if it's 'free' it can be placed on Commons for the entire Wikimedia community :) , You cannot say that about some other archives and galleries. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:47, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
thank you! That's brilliant. I just found the list of files, and there are several which I had'nt tagged properly or were somehow or other taken off and would be great to get back. There are several photos, for example, loaded by me but taken by someone now 82 not au fait with e-mail so could'nt send her 'permission' e-mails.Rodolph (talk) 23:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. In this instance, you might have to do it the old-fashioned way, which is the formal (postal) letter/notice  :( . The Foundation has in the past handled mailed in permissions. You'd need to ask someone else for the correct mailing address though. You probably have a better idea of what to put in formal letters of that sort than I do though. <smile> Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:09, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
thank you. Much appreciated.Rodolph (talk)

I have recently updated the information on this image, to bring it's {{information}} block up to a very high standard.

It would be greatly appreciated if you could give this a review before the image is transfered to commons.

It would also greatly aid the reuse of other archive material you donated, if you would consider updating the descriptions you have uploaded for other media, and archive material.

Thank you again for uploading what in many instances is unique archive material, which greatly aids Wikipedia's presentation of the topics to which they relate. If only some other archives were as gracious with donation of important archive material. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the expansions, that information block is now at the level you see in proffessional archives, Well Done :). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:43, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(To aid the identification of other material - You might want to checky your upload-log here:- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&offset=&limit=500&type=upload&user=Rodolph&page=&tagfilter=&hide_patrol_log=1&hide_review_log=1&hide_thanks_log=1)

Two longshots, (i) Do you have a record of the silversmiths name? (ii) Does the silver jug (assuming it's still accessible) concerned have an assay mark? This would allow a more specifc date to be added to the {{information}} entry?

My apologies if this seems a little over-enthusiastic, but good catlog entries make for good archives of media :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:12, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for excellent follow up and attention to detail, and thanks for your kind comments and encouragement. I will add maker and date to that image, (though there is scope in that case for confusion in that I don't think the engraving was done by the silversmith, and was added later), as soon as I can.Rodolph (talk)
(Aside) If Vincent Price's musing's on art in a radio play suggested anything to me it was that with arts and works of craftsmanship, nothing is 'ever going to be definitive. <smiles> Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Images at Commons

[edit]

A while back it seems then I transfered some of your images over to Commons I grouped them into a category: see: Commons:Category:Salis collection images. You may wish to review what Commons contributors have added in terms of additional data :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did a caption pull, could probably do with a review. Sorry to keep on at you :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm.. Deleted because the artist wasn't identifed, can you recall whom it might have been?. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:42, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly deleted because I had uploaded before the rules changed and it then fell short of the improved scrutiny?

Anyway this one is now back at: File:Jerome de Salis (1710-1794) oval portrait, circa 1760, grayscale version.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jerome_de_Salis_(1710-1794)_oval_portrait,_circa_1760,_grayscale_version.jpg Rodolph (talk)

Information updated by merging some captions, review as always much appreciated. Thanks.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:44, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea of the date of original portrait? Obviously Late 18th century, but it would be nice to be more specifc. :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this was a studio photo from the setting.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BTW {{infosplit}} is a recommended way of doing split credits (and I recently got the template implemented at Wikimed Commons, specifically for that reason. For more information see the template documentation.)

If it's your scans/photos don't be embarrassed to take reasonable credit. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another image improved. Note the {{infosplit}} has a third field that will let you note the designer of the interior and so on. Please read the template documentation for details. Thanks you for working with other contributors to improve the "catalog entries" <smile> Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:14, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the bio on Cooper, Robert. (It's still in the history though), as it probably better suited to a stub bio. Couldn't find much on them via Google, although a Google Books result indicated that there was a "Robert Cooper" recorded by the Goldsmiths company in London for the appropriate dates. Not sure where to find other sources for a stub as art history isn't my subject.

Thanks for your efforts Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:08, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another 'catalog entry' improved. - Ideally the term waiter (refering to the platter) should link to a suitable article,I've not done this because I wasn't sure where to link it,(the disambig page for waiter links to the occupation, or some films.)Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:21, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another item cataloged, Out of interest, which Stanhope? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:34, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recently undeleted :).

Does Wikipedia (or Wikimedia Commons) have a version of the full portrait, that I could use to transfer over things like the artist name? 12:11, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you :) That should allow someone else to track down the artist. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Deleted Images)

[edit]

Unexpectedly another contributors left a list of Deleted (or Transfered) images on my talk page.

You might want to look through it, with a view to recovering some of the still deleted images (the red linked) ones.

Obviously, material that's still got copyright issues can't be un-deleted, but with a compelling argument many of the older images that would be PD-UK or PD-art are potentially recoverable. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS sent? Checking because it seems to have been deleted merely because it was orphaned. You seemed to be a 'bit put out' at the time if the original discussion is anything to go by.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:25, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Further - User_talk:Amatulic#File:24February2007Reeling.jpg Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive any anger. I was a wee bit put out at the time because a certain 'editor' was I thought going after me, or at least it felt that way at the time, 2009-2010. Rodolph2 (talk) 22:27, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS sent? This was apprently deleted over a 'permissions' concern. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:34, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for all these enquires, but... This image is now at Commons, I note the topiary choice here resembles a mitre? Was there a particular reason for this other then the choice of the topiarist? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:37, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This was deleted from Fingask Castle, probably because I had uploaded it under old rules and an rather officious supervisor then deleted it without much care. I mean it is clearly OLD-art. In the Fingask case I had read that where an article was getting too long the Wiki guide line was to make two or three articles in its place. This I did, only to then find some other uber-editor deciding that the subject should be re-consolidated back to one, which they then did, with some blood-shed!Rodolph (talk)

Another one undeleted!

I'd suggest getting in touch with Peripitus and Amatulic who have done some reviewing and cleanup in response to my enquires! Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:04, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Australiam Legendary Tales

[edit]

File:AustralianMythsLondonLibraryBook.jpg - cover scan of the book Australian Legendary Tales. No article on the book and the image contains a bookplate from http://www.londonlibrary.co.uk/ - Peripitus (Talk) 13:15, 17 May 2014 (UTC) That was a scan or photo of a book cover, done by me, from 1897, 117 years ago, illustrating an article on the London Library, an image which I would have thought was ok? See: http://www.lwcurrey.com/pages/books/138924/mrs-k-langloh-parker-catherine-somerville-later-mrs-percival-r-stow-field-parker/australian-legendary-tales-folk-lore-of-the-noongahburrahs-as-told-to-the-piccaninnies-collected Rodolph (talk)

If it's this author (and the illustration is hers),- Catherine Eliza Somerville (Katie) Stow (1856-1940),[[1]] then it's PD-Australia. And given that Australia applies a 50 year pma term, was PD in Australia in 1990 ( prior to 1996). Does anyone reading this page have access to a library to check the book? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:49, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If the illustration shown is by Tommy Mcrae (noted in your source) they died around 1901, - http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/mcrae-tommy-13074. I think there's a good argument for restoring this one to Commons :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
well done! The London Library's copy is the same edition (greenish) as the one shown by the link, i.e. 1897.User:Rodolph
Here's what was written four years ago: File:AustralianMythsLondonLibraryBook (see below)
  • Australian Legendary Tales, Folk-lore, collected by Mrs. K. Langloh Parker, published in London (David Nutt) & Melbourne (Melville, Mullen & Slade), 1896. Mrs Parker died in 1940. Maker of cover unknown, done circa 1895/96. Book published in 1896. (Rodolph (talk) 17:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC) Rodolph (talk) 17:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC))Rodolph2 (talk) 22:49, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The cover may be fine (someone in Canberra Australia could look at the copy in the Petherick Reading Room of the National Library to confirm the provenance of the cover illustration) but where will it be used. The book has no article ? No copies stored in my neck of the woods sorry - Peripitus (Talk) 10:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We have an article on the writer (under a later name) K_Langloh_Parker with a list of works. Use of a notable work by an author, to accompany a biblographic list has been done in other articles, especially where the cover image helps the reader identify the style of the works concerned. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Further, The cover under discussion seems to be for the first book listed in the bibliography in the respective article. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:56, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
the library's label on the cover was mentioned as a possible copyright problem. The label is this:
now superseded London Library label by Reynolds Stone
, by Reynolds Stone. Stone died as recently as 1979, so assume his design is allowed as it it is fair use (and good for his reputation for it to be seen). Rodolph (talk) 14:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PLEASE RESTORE THIS IMAGE Rodolph (talk) 17:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]