User talk:Leahtwosaints/Archive 14

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Re: Question

I think the right infobox for articles like Gilbert Bécaud is Template:Infobox musical artist. See for example Stephen Sondheim (composer), Burt Bacharach (composer but also performer), Paul Simon (equally known for both) ... all use that infobox. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:41, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

John Illsey

They're not great as the detail is a little fuzzy, but might be okay for what you have in mind:

Catfish Jim & the soapdish 07:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Duplicate photos

Done! J Milburn (talk) 13:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem!

Please tinker away! Haha, some of those leads could do with a bit of tinkering. I don't have very much time at the moment so go right ahead and do whatever seems like a good idea. I hope you don't mind I made a couple of little adjustments to Phil's lead - I keep meaning to dig out all his poetry books and make a little section for them in the article :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:38, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I fixed the double use of "frontman" in the intro - I didn't actually write any of that intro myself, I just moved some clauses around and moved a wikilink or two. I'll look for a cite for the poetry books :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 11:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Leahtwosaints. You have new messages at Joren's talk page.
Message added 03:01, 6 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

cindy blackman, kaki king, and general irriation with wikipedia.

no problem with the work in question, but its from around 2007. we wanted to do something updated. tried to upload some other stuff to commons; not sure if it posted. i mean, we can use whatever but the photo is outdated. yes i work for the label. several labels. its not so much promotion as much as that the previous wiki page was ragged and needed restruction. and yeah. for the trillionth time, i keep doing the 4~ and the tag attached is what you get. really im at the end. something that really used to be fairly easy is becoming impossible with you deleting peoples pages before we even get started. so someone make some suggestions. it took us a good minute to get the outlay for the stone mecca page up and you deleted it. you guys keep asking for people to donate and add content but then you make it impossible to do basic fucking work while trying to learn the process. suggestions please.

-E 20:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

George Duke

A bit fuzzy, but what the hey...

Catfish Jim & the soapdish 12:05, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Photos uploaded...

How about a banner like this:

		Photos uploaded to Wikimedia Commons by Leahtwosaints
		I used to maintain a list of photos of musicians that I uploaded via Creative Commons to Wikimedia Commons on my user page, but after uploading about 625 (very few are multiple pictures of the same person) I decided to place them on their own special page Currently, the list stands at more than 1,200.

Catfish Jim & the soapdish 12:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

That Box can be edited here: User:Leahtwosaints/userboxes/commons

If you'd rather it in the form of, say, a user box, or want something fancier, just ask. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 20:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Worse duplicate and triplicate photos!!

I'm sorry I didn't get back to you quickly. I'll be honest, I despise the mad categorisation on Commons. I'm an admin there, but that's so I can deal with copyright and OTRS issues; categorisation is a corner I won't go if I can avoid it... I'm not really the guy to be asking, sorry. J Milburn (talk) 01:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Couple of questions needing clarification

A category like Category:Columbia Records artists means artists signed to that label. So if an artist is just guesting or collaborating on somebody else's album that appears on that label, then no, the category would not be warranted. So for example Eric Clapton appears on the White Album, but he does not belong in Category:Apple Records artists because he was never signed to Apple.

Coding like [[Columbia Records|CBS Records|CBS|]] is a mistake; there can only be one "pipe" in a link.

An imprint is generally just a division or brand within a major label, I think. Sort of like how Chevrolet and Cadillac are both divisions or brands within General Motors. If the imprint has a WP article, I'd use and link to that; if not, I'd use and link to the major label. Wasted Time R (talk) 17:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Derek Trucks, Susan Tedeschi & Band

Thanks for your note about my effort to get the Derek Trucks & Susan Tedeschi Band page started. I'd certainly appreciate any help you have to offer since I am most definitely new to this. Anyway I wanted to take the time to get the Derek & Susan Band page started and from there, I wanted to create or add to the pages for the individual band members as needed. I've already made minor additions to the Oteil Burbridge and Mike Mattison pages, and hope to do more in the coming weeks including creating pages for Tyler Greenwell, JJ Johnson and Kofi Burbridge. My big failure was adding a picture via Wikimedia Commons - I see you're an expert of sorts in that regard. If you'd like I can send along a picture of the new band, as well as any pictures of band members, with all appropriate permissions from the photographers, in hopes that maybe you can add to the pages (since I'm failing so thoroughly in this regard to date). I will most definitely check out the resources you've added to your talk page, those look very helpful at first glance, and hopefully we can coordinate efforts to whip these pages into shape for all of the people in the Derek Trucks & Susan Tedeschi musical network. Thanks! Marclowe06 (talk) 23:23, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

definition of BLP

Hi Leah, while its true that the BLP policy applies to any information abut an identifiable living person, the BLP tags are meant to mark biographies of living people. Not rock groups. Cheers Ϣere SpielChequers 16:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Watermarks

I guess there's usually a reason they're there, but I'm going to assume the copyright is fine... First one...

Catfish Jim & the soapdish 22:39, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Next one, slightly more complex, but I've clonestamped this one too, when it would have been easier to crop it:

Catfish Jim & the soapdish 22:53, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... there's another problem with the last one, in that it's disappeared. It was there, and I have edited it to remove the watermark, but I can't upload it to wiki commons without the original file being there as I don't have the correct details. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 23:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Problem solved... the file had been moved as per the incorrect name... [1]

Catfish Jim & the soapdish 23:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

--KirkStauffer (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2010 (UTC)--KirkStauffer (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year's

Leah, my dear sister, have a Happy New Year's and let us remain close like brother and sister! Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 22:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I sure will! Thanks as always! Best, --Discographer (talk) 22:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Multi-questions

I've introduced myself to Kirk; he knows where I am now if I can be of any help. Yep, I'm an admin on Commons too, and you're welcome to email me. You genuinely will probably get a quicker reply on my talk page, but, of course, if the message is more private, email is completely fine. I have uploaded music samples, yeah- you can only upload .ogg format, so if you have mp3s or something, you'll need to convert them- sites like this may be able to help you (though I haven't used it before). What was it that you were wanting help with? J Milburn (talk) 01:15, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, as I say, if you have music files of other file types, you'll have to get them converted; see this page, which recommends Audacity as a sound editor. If using something like that would be a little difficult for you, you could email me the sound files (email me through Wikipedia, I'll reply, you reply to that with the sound files attached) with a note saying where in the song you want (say, 0:19-0:30) and I could send back a file for you. This page also has some helpful information, including about non-free content; a thing to remember is that you are talking about non-free sound files, and so their use must be compliant with the non-free content criteria. J Milburn (talk) 12:35, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Clear Light

Done. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean – I did do the album page, at Clear Light (album). Anyway, Happy New Year, Leah. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Johhny Kalsi - Musician

Hello, I noticed your comments on the talk page of Johnny Kalsi musician. I thought it would be good to hear your comments on this article. This is one of my first attempts at a Musicians biography. I have tried to remove the peacock content, clarify issues, and add some links to other associated bands etc. I know what has been found in the way of refs are not the best quality, but they do offer some support to the article. Am I moving it in the right direction? Be interesting to have your comments please.Francis E Williams (talk) 21:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for the message. Re: Johnny Kalsi, BTW- I was horrified at my tone on his talk page! It just goes to show- we all have grumpy days! Give me about 8 hrs. or so (from whatever the time stamp is on this message), and I'll be happy to assist! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 10:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for the template, really cool, much better than the one I was given in 2009. I really appreciate your sharing it, I did make comments about making it easier for new users to get on easily on Wiki. That template hits the spot !. It`s about one of the only things that will remain on the page for good. I guess you`re still busy at the moment with other musical orientated content. Thanks once again.Francis E Williams (talk) 19:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I glanced over Johnny Kalsi's article. How would you feel if, when I find little spots needing a little more attention, I can make notes so you'll always know? I'm happy to help! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 02:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I note your comments about my appearance on Wiki, it has been developed recently to appear this way to try and deter "well meaning" editors from making rather patronising remarks, and for using the "delete" key un-neccessarily while I am actually working on articles. I have Macular degeneration which means I can take up to 20 miutes to checkover/insert a ref. or even a relatively small amount of content. (this message 45 mins so far). It`s very annoying when I have researched, or have great in-depth knowledge, about a subject to have it altered by individuals whose limited knowledge of subject matter is very obvious. It will offend many if I were to be direct in my approach with them, so I try to be persistent with my contributions to improve this publication. I alerted you to the Johhny Kalsi article knowing that you have great experience in this field, and noted that you had given up on trying to make it better. Please improve it further if you can. I have spent two days looking for better refs and more suitable content but can find no more (other than self promotion sites).Francis E Williams (talk) 03:10, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

OK!! :)) I'll go over Kalsi's page, and in both the edit summary after each time, and on your talk page, I'll explain what I did and why. Thus far, I did notice that Kalsi's article has his birthdate and place of birth missing. Usually biographies are more specific than only mentioning that he is from the Punjab area of India, although having that, at least beats having nothing!

Hello again, with regard to articles. I have set my watchlist prefernce to add very page I edit. So I can see instantly any changes and content comments made by other people in the edit summary or diff. So, it will not be necessary for me to have futher information. But thank you for the kind thoughts. The lack of place and date of birth is exactly why I managed to retain a point of origin for the subject. The original article was difficult to corelate, [2], much of the information was scattered all over the article. I have mo connection with this aretist or his style of music, but I was a druumer in 1965. I have edited {{Vikram Singh]] also, another musician of Indian origin. I have been able to contact him personally, and he has removed information from the article, to make it more accurate than it was. The translation into English by the original contributors made much of the content ambiguous. The lack of ONE letter, and no emphasis on another word completely misled the reader (me) to assume that a PLACE was being described not an EVENT. An example is a possible missing "a" in the word "Hisa(a)r, my research has revealed it is a place in northern India, but more likely it may refer to the annual celebration festival called "Hassaar". Another example is the word "Riyaaz" in Vikram Singhs article. It is both a Musical Institue in India, but is also the name of a a vocal exercise. Once the correct emphasis was placed by Mr. Singh to the article word, unlinked content and references were removed. However, Mr. Singh has still not provided his bithplace or date of birth. I guess he is worried about identity theft and invasion to his privacy at the moment. Presumably Mr. Kalsi has the same concerns. I have discovered in my recent research of Indian websites that it is common practice to assume a similar or identical name for commercial gain in the music industry. This will always be a problem in biographies involving subjects from India. Wiki actually blocks most of India.co.cc URL sources as references also. .... Enough, time for a break.Francis E Williams (talk) 14:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, biographies are quite difficult, especially when the subjects are "BLP"s (Biographies of living persons). However, I urge you to look here at the 5 Pillars of Wikipedia WP:FIVEPILLARS. They are the very foundation of what guidelines we have. As I mentioned before, one of them is to assume good faith, and to be civil. However, another now comes to mind. Right or wrong, there is to be no original research. That places contacting the subjects of the biographies you are working on in a very thin gray line between what is acceptable and what is not. Please remember that now that the Wikipedia (in it's myriad of languages, etc.) is usually in the first five results when people search for information in Google, thus making it terribly tempting for the subjects of articles to seek free promotion or at least more visibility, and that isn't even taking into consideration workers like A&R people from the record labels or other businesses.. contacting ANY biography subject, their families, or whatever may not hold up to scrutiny. It is why our rules about keeping a neutral point of view in the articles NPOV so important. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 21:06, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for the advice but during the last two years on Wiki I have already encountered all the above points you made. If you look at the Johnny Kalsi article history you will see that I have removed all self promotional information and content that cannot be verified. If you look at the Vikram Singh history you`ll find the same approach has been taken. My difficulty with Vikram Singh was precisely your point about self promotion, there was too much ambiguity in the reserch process. Mr Singh himself has REMOVED content and many references I found that are NOT attributed to him. This was done with his co-operation under my strict supervision. He has not reinstated any self promotional coontent which was present in the original article. I have placed the talk material on your page for historical record as I am now going to delete it from my page. This is allowable as we are the only contribtors to this discussion. Thank you for your comment and well intended assistance. I have nothing else to say with regard to this subject.Francis E Williams (talk) 11:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

copyvio reply

Hello, Leahtwosaints. You have new messages at Tvoz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tvoz/talk 19:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio Information

Hello again, I have spotted your dilemna with Tiff Merritt. I always check the originator of the article out before editing BIOs. This link is the originator, who is no longer on Wiki, but his talk page is still up.:- [3], there appears to be many links on the Internet for this person and Tiff Merritt. I have found that a lot of artists actually use a link to Wiki to automatically update their Bio. (I hope I`m not teching my grandmother how to suck eggs here, I just thought I`d like to return the favour). That is what makes our job so much more difficult. If a positive link can be proved then I would like to comment that it cound be a candidate for speedy deletion.Francis E Williams (talk) 21:35, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S. this could well be the clincher link for you.[4]Francis E Williams (talk) 21:40, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

PPS. This guy seems to be the main promotor on all the forums as well.[5]Francis E Williams (talk) 22:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

To Francis E Williams, I appreciate your intention to be helpful. However, I must ask you not to comment on my conversations with other editors on my talk page. Often I have other, not obvious reasons for asking specific people about particular topics or other users. I'm sorry but I am used to handling many issues on a very low-key non confrontational basis if at all possible. Thanks for understanding. I will copy this note to your talk page as well. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 00:14, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk

I observed the concern about violation issues because I had added comments to your talk page previously, as a result, my watch page flagged up a summary containing "copyvio". I thought it might apply to what we were previously discussing about 2 Bios, Vikram Singh and Johnny Kalsi. I observed that your concern was being addressed on another users page, that both parts of the discussion were being held on that page. I therefore added my comments to your page so that only you would observe them as a seperate conversation. I should have started a new section, but it takes so much longer to do this.

Template linking - Bio

In the last few days I have been citing and editing random Bios, I observed that as I made changes in Wiki, they were being reflected on some subjects web site pages. This was making it difficult to locate original information about the subject. A lot of people appear to be using the "open source" nature of Wiki content and not attributing the content to Wikipedia on their site. You can now perhaps understand why I alerted you to this fact.

howdy

{user:chzz/tb|Howdy}} Chzz ► 08:07, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I've moved that reply to User talk:Chzz/Archive 28#howdy - just 'coz my talk page was getting a bit long. In case you need to refer to it. Cheers, Chzz ► 11:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what to say-

Hi Francis. I never meant for you to take my comments on the Kalsi talk page personally... I admire your intelligence and willingness! You have far more computer smarts that I do; a great advantage! But in the 4 years or so I've edited the English and some other language Wikipedias, I found that sometimes what is acceptable on the other Wikipedias, or even in my past, editing at a local University-- is not acceptable for the English Wikipedia. I had to adapt. The changes I made on the Johnny Kalsi article are ones that meet compliance per: WP:MOS and WP:RELY. Have a look. I realize it's frustrating not to be able to use information from fan sites, You Tube, commercial, and promotional sites (WP:POV problems). Many editors choose to edit artists they like. Kalsi's article is doubly problematic since his music is more obscure, and it's harder to find reliable references because he is somewhat cut off from many Western audiences. One thing you CAN do though, is to record some sound bites from a couple of his songs showing how his music advanced, OR showing his versatility. I really hope you know my changes are not personal, just constructive criticism. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 19:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no desire to visit fan sites, twitter, facebook etc, etc for references. I have NO intention of adding a subjects own Website URL to ANY article. That breaches self promotion rules, and ENCOURAGES outrageous and self promotional content to be added to their site. This type of link should be removed from ALL articles immediately. Also, I have NO intention of breaching the artists copyright, what ever counry they reside in. The very act of inserting just ONE clip of a track into this Encyclopedia? is an infringement of interlectual ownership. Why do you think I went the safe route with the free links?

"Wikipedia:Video links - There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites through external links or when citing sources. However, such links must abide by various policies and guidelines. Linking to such sites is often discouraged due to misuse. Copyright is of particular concern. Reliability of the uploader and video must always be established".

I am so incensed by this issue now, if I do find ANY U.K. studio recorded commercial "sample" material in ANY article on this encyclopedia I will forward its full details of posting to the Performing Rights Society, who will be more than delighted to prosecute. I used to own and run a professional recording studio of my own. I still have contacts in the industry in the U.K.Francis E Williams (talk) 22:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Ending this conversation

Francis, I never meant for your feelings to be hurt. I left my comments a long while ago on the talk page for Johnny Kalsi, only cause I found a photo of him to use. Anytime I add a photo where one is needed, I do a little "clean up", while I'm there. I never thought I'd hear anything about him or that article. I've edited thousands of articles, so I was surprised to hear from you about it, and I only pointed out diversions from basic fundamentals to editing biography articles: the Manual of Style (WP:MOS, for example,) and information I had shown to me while I'd made mistakes and learned from them, like the templates I gave you to help you. There's no reason to feel personally attacked. I don't even know you, why would I want to hurt you?

I mentioned You Tube as being a tricky situation. Some people often post videos there that they have used without permission, meaning that they violated the original copyright. Also, sometimes it's just a hassle since that person might close their account and our link to a reference becomes "dead". We do use videoed interviews and the like for references, but I feel that since the possibility of a link becoming dead is there, they should have another reference in print with any "fact". It's just taking chances, which is hard. Thus, the videos, sure, they can be used in some cases as an inline reference, but there isn't a "Listening section" on musician's articles. At the most, we tape a small fragment of a song, and using the law and help of the Wikimedia Commons folks, we can display just a tiny example of the music to get the feel of songwriter's music. See the FA-ranked John Lennon article, which contains music clips, for example.

Because I really have work to do, things I want to seen done in other areas of the Wikipedia, I'd like just to end our conversations (of any kind; on any part of Wikipedia), and I will leave the Johnny Kalsi article to you to do as you wish. I would like to resume editing my pages of interest as I did previous to our encounter this week, and assume good faith from you. It appears that each time we have interacted, we have clashed, which is no good. So, hopefully, you'll see that I mean no harm. I will post this on your talk page. Please do not contact me further- there are many other editors who can give you advice. Thanks. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 17:54, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I have only a few comments to make, in the nicest possible way. The reason that there was ever any conflict was brought about by your inability to read what was available for anyone to see. Comments on my talk page, history and comments in the article all providing information about what was done, and why. I just saw your comments on the Johnny Kalsi talk page, and as courtesy to perhaps improve your apparent low self esteem, I sought your involvement to provide encoragement to persist with the article. We all carry our baggage with us on here, I don`t make casual edits, I research the article content thoroughly, and then edit.

Your first edit on Johhny Kalsi had him "looking for work" in bands while still at school. I had to correct this, as it was not inline with research done. You may do as you wish with the article also, as will other editors, but it helps to be accurate with content. I really wish I hadn`t bothered to contact you or involve you further with the article in the first place, I could have avioded the patronising remarks and repeated "lessons" on how to contribute.

My user page shows the articles I have worked on, but not the content added to articles. I could easily flit about, (as some editors do) and rack up huge numbers, but I don`t.. All the long hours of unneccesary typing could have been avoided. My feeling are not hurt in any way, how could they be? I expressed my sheer frustrations with you on the talk page. Where were the other contributors hiding that you addressed your remarks to? Best regards, and if you see a warning on a talk page again perhaps you might heed it.Francis E Williams (talk) 18:40, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Image advice for The Byrds article

Hi Leahtwosaints! I'm not sure if you'll remember me or not, but we exchanged words during the first half of last year about a range of subjects. I'm approaching you now because I see from your user page that you do a lot of adding of pictures to music articles. You're obviously pretty well versed in WP image copyright policy and procedure...so I'd like to ask your opinion on something.

I'm currently working hard to get The Byrds article ready for a GA nomination and I'd really like to add more images to the article. I've already added a few images myself but I've found an online Sony Records promo gallery of Byrds photographs (see here) and wondered if it might be possible to use any of these images in the Byrds Wiki article? I notice that the image currently being used in the article's infobox is a similar promo image, as outlined in the Wikipedia fair-use rational for it...so perhaps this would be possible?

In particular, I'd like to use this image in the article's "Gram Parsons era" sub-section, to illustrate the band's line-up during their country-rock phase (which is somewhat different to the earlier line-up represented in the infobox). Anyway, I guess I'm just looking for some advice on how best to get more Byrds-related images into the article. Many thanks in advance for your help. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 09:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your reply! That's too bad about the photographs on the Sony website that I linked to. They are obviously put there for promotional use in print publications and the like, so it seems strange that there would be any issue with using them on Wikipedia. But I bow to your superior knowledge of these things. As for using Flickr, I'm glad you brought that up because, actually, I'd sort of preempted you and had a look on there myself. There are definitely a couple of photos that I found that could be used, if only the owner's would give up their copyright and use a Wikipedia Creative Commons license instead.

The first picture I found (see here) would work really well in the "Folk rock (1965-1966)" sub-section. It was taken by the Flickr uploader themselves, back in 1965, so perhaps it might be worth approaching them to see whether they would be prepared to release the photograph for use on Wikipedia? Would you mind doing this for me? I would do it myself but its obvious that you have much more experience in this area than I do. However, one thing I would say is that ideally, I'd like to crop that photo slightly (at the top, and also to get rid of the frame) and try to repair some of the "chipping" present on it. What do you think our chances of persuading the owner to let us edit their photo would be? :-)

There's also another picture here that I've found on Flickr, which would be good for The Byrds article. In addition, looking at The Beatles article, I notice that the editors there have successfully used images from films and TV broadcasts. Is this perhaps something that we could do on The Byrds article too? --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 09:50, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

That's great that you've already got a somewhat positive response from the owner of one of those two Byrds photos that I spotted on Flickr. It would be great to be able to use them both in the article. Speaking of which, what did you think of my earlier mention of being allowed to crop and repair this photo? Do you think that this might be possible?

I've also found another photo that might be useful here...it's a photo of a Rickenbacker 360 12-string guitar that's very similar to the one played by Byrds guitarist Roger McGuinn in the mid-1960s. The article makes numerous mentions of the Rickenbacker 12-string, so it might be nice to have an illustration of one. I'm happy to approach this user myself regarding use on Wikipedia, but I'm wondering if you could give me a few tips on how best to convince the photograph's owner to change their copyright to a Creative Commons license?

As for album covers and the like, I think we're fine for those, thanks. To be honest, I don't believe any of The Byrds' album covers are famous enough to warrant an illustration in the main Byrds article and of course, they're all viewable on the band's individual album articles anyway. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 13:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

You are free to use the photo of the Rickenbacker 360/12 if you like ( my photo and my guitar!) However you might want to be aware that McGuinn was more famous for using a 370/12 which is the 3 pickup version. Thanks. 68.167.223.30 (talk) 21:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for kindly offering the use of your photo in The Byrds article. Yes, you're absolutely right that Roger McGuinn is more famous for playing a 370 model, but it was a 360 that he originally bought in 1964, after seeing A Hard days Night. He used that 360 on the "Mr. Tambourine Man" single and the album of the same name, but it was stolen during The Byrds' August 1965 English tour. That was when he transitioned to playing the 370 12-string. I would probably make a note of this fact in the picture caption. Thank you once again for letting us use your photograph on Wikipedia. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 00:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the Flickr info chart Leahtwosaints and your e-mail...both are very, very helpful. As for whether or not this photo belongs to the Flickr user Jan Tonnesen, I was flicking through a recent book on The Byrds yesterday (it was published in 2008) and I came across the very same photograph! When I flipped to the back of the book to check the photo credits, sure enough, it was attributed Jan Tonnesen. Since that photo was originally uploaded to Flickr in Feburary 2007, I can only assume that the book's author also found it on Flickr and approached the owner himself, in much the same way we are. I realise that this doesn't necessarily prove conclusively that it is the property of Tonnesen, but I'm sure the book's publishers would've wanted to be sure about this too, so it certainly makes it very likely that everything is OK and above board. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 08:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Backlog of questions

I've introduced myself to Kirk Stauffer as requested and left a "hello" message on his talk page. With regards to the bot that automatically archives talk pages, I'm sure that I could figure it out for you without too much trouble. If you're OK with allowing me to edit your talk page, I'll get this set up for you as soon as I can. Just let me know.

With regard to articles featured on DYK, yes, I've been involved with a few of these. The DYK process and criteria are fairly strict though. Firstly, only brand new articles, no older than 5 days, or articles that have been expanded fivefold in the last 5 days are eligible. The assessors are really hot on these criteria (in my limited experience). In addition, brand new articles have to be at least 1,500 characters long (not including references, infoboxes, lists or tables etc, etc) and must be really well sourced with plenty of inline citations.

The key thing to remember is that DYK isn't meant to be a general trivia section, it's meant to be a showcase for new Wikipedia articles (as the tag line on the main page says; "From Wikipedia's newest articles:"). If you have articles that meet these criterea and you want to nominate them for DYK, just let me know and I'll be happy to walk you through the nomination process. :-) --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 13:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Leahtwosaints. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Photo credits question

Hi Leahtwosaints, I have been in contact with someone who has some nice photos of notable people, but who is reluctant to release them under a free license as he fears he will not receive photo credit in the caption or article text. I know when you add images you often add such credits (thanks again for finding so many musician images and uploading them). My basic question is, do you have any advice on doing that? Do such edits stick or do the credits get removed? I thought of asking at the Village Pump, but figured you might be a better person to ask. Hope all is well, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed reply. The person is Roger Ebert, who is a registered user here and has made some edits, including uploading some photos (one of himself with Peter O'Toole and Jason Patric, two of Russ Meyer). On Ebert's facebook page he has some great photos of celecbrities that he (Ebert) has taken over the years - not sure if anyone can see this or not, but this is one of Studs Terkel and Mike Royko. It is much better than the pic of Studs Terkel and there is no free image of Mike Royko. Ebert has lots of great candid shots like this. So I emailed him and said how I appreciated his work and the photos he had already uploaded and would he consider adding a free license to his Facebook photos for their use on Wikipedia. THEN HE WROTE BACK (sorry - I got pretty excited). Anyway he said that he would freely license them if he thought he'd get a photo credit. I asked if he meant attribution in the caption or article text and he said yep. So I knew you had done such attributions and thought I would ask what your experience has been - I know they are discouraged, but I might make an exception here and try it with his pics already on Wikipedia just to see what happens. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

PS I like the attribution in the file title idea and the category idea. I don't want to pester him, so I think I will try attribution and making categories and see how it works, then write him one last time. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)