User talk:Kavdiaravish
Welcome[edit]
|
The article Portrait of Daniel-Henry Kahnweiler has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Has no visible verifiable references from reliable sources.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 22:39, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Your contributed article, Self Portrait (Painting)[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Self Portrait (Painting). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Portrait of the Artist Holding a Thistle. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Portrait of the Artist Holding a Thistle – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.
If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Harry the Dog WOOF 09:14, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Kavdiaravish, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]
|
Hi Kavdiaravish! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
DYK for Young Man at His Window[edit]
 | On 12 March 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Young Man at His Window, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Émile Zola wrote that Gustave Caillebotte's Young Man at His Window (pictured) represents "anti-artistic painting ... because of the exactitude of the copying"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Young Man at His Window. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 00:22, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
About Family of Acrobats (study)[edit]
Hi Kavdiaravish, and again welcome to Wikipedia!
It would appear to me that what you are writing about is a study for Family of Saltimbanques. Is that correct?
Pete aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Shirt58,
Heads up to you, Family of Saltimbanques is a different painting from Family of Acrobats (study). It was painted in Rose period by Pablo Picasso along with several other painting such as "Family of Acrobats with Monkey" during 1904-1906. Characters in Family of Saltimbanques and Family of Acrobats (study) are different however they might appear similar to a layman. Link of Image is available on PabloPicasso.org. If you still have questions please let me know. Kavdiaravish (talk) 11:10, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyrights[edit]
You are free to use a source for information, but you may not copy the source verbatim without indicating that you have done so (by placing the text in quotes or as a block quote). Such quotes should be brief, not entire paragraphs. I have rewritten the "Description" section of [The Child's Brain]] to fix this problem. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Can you provide me with the direct quotes from the sources you used for the description in Jealousy (painting)? I can't examine it myself, but it reads like it is either original research or a copyright violation. Ryan Vesey 18:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Sure, these are not original research. I have dedicated last 8 years to know exact sources about painting and artwork and finally I am in last year of PHD on Art unexplored. Review following links
Thats is why i have mentioned them in references. Please let us know in case of further clarification. Kavdiaravish (talk) 19:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- So, we have some difficulty since I am not able to access the full preview of the books. In any case, I was able to determine that the statement "The archetypal image of sexual congress/betrayal in the background — the faceless man and woman he clothed in black, she with red robe parted to display her nakedness while she reaches for the apple from the tree as her lover's first gift — is, in fact, the mind screen of the sufferer of jealousy whose brooding" is a copyright violation from page 339 of this book. When you copy material from a book or another site into a Wikipedia article, you are re-releasing copyrighted content under a new Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. This is worse than normal copyright violations or plagiarism in that reusers may unintentionally infringe on the copyright of the original author, assuming the Wikipedia copyright is correct. You can read here for our policy on copyright violations and let me know if you have any questions. Ryan Vesey 19:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- I'd second Ryan Vesey's concerns, and add another: it appears you've included an external link to Wahooarts in every article. It's a website that sells painted reproductions, WP:SPAM. This, for example, is not an acceptable source for scholarship [1]. 99.136.255.134 (talk) 12:42, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
March 2013[edit]
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 99.136.255.134 (talk) 10:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. 99.136.255.134 (talk) 12:59, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for creating articles on great paintings. Unfortunately you've also left a plethora of linkspam and copyright violations in your wake. 99.136.255.134 (talk) 12:59, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 31[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Allegory of Sculpture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cardboard (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) 19:55, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Your use of copyrighted material[edit]
Hey there. I was just going through the backlog of new pages and I noticed that Near the Bed of Death (Fever) had a paragraph of text directly copied from the link you provided. While I appreciate your effort to add paintings to Wikipedia, we cannot use copyrighted material, especially without directly quoting and crediting the quote. I don't know how many other articles like this you've made, but if you've directly copied text onto them you should go back and rewrite/remove that text. Thank you very much! —Ignatzmicetalkcontribs 00:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts[edit]
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kavdiaravish, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
Ryan Vesey 01:30, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Notice[edit]
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Kavdiaravish/User:Stonex201. Thank you. Ryan Vesey 01:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
April 2013[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Drmies (talk) 14:45, 9 April 2013 (UTC)Community banned[edit]
Per this discussion at AN/I, you, and all sockpuppet accounts you may have had, have now, or will create in the future, are banned by the community from editing Wikipedia. If you wish to appeal this ban, please contact the Ban Appeals Subcommittee. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:35, 12 April 2013 (UTC)