User talk:Martynsaxman

Welcome!

Hello, Martynsaxman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Chalkhill Estate. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Chalkhill Estate

Can you add some references for the information that you added to the Chalkhill Estate article? Methods on for to do it can be found at WP:CITE. Thanks. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot

Hi Martynsaxman! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Nathan2055 (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 03:00, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Chalkhill Estate.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Chalkhill Estate.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

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 (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SuperMarioMan 04:10, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Agave-pita-plant.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Agave-pita-plant.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

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 (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, just to clarify this situation: thank you for being willing to contribute this image to Wikipedia; however, according to our WP:Free content policy, we can accept images only if they are released under a fully free license, including free re-use by anybody else. The way you tagged the file, you seemed to imply you were offering it only for use in Wikipedia. Much as we appreciate the offer, we'd have to decline it in the interest of keeping Wikipedia's contents free for all. If you wish to keep the file on Wikipedia and it's your own property, you may choose to place it under a free license such as {{cc-by-sa}}, by adding the corresponding tag to the file page. Thanks, – Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, sorry I am a little confused - are you saying I can't use my photographs in a Wikipedia article that I am editing? Please can you explain what you mean by adding a corresponding tag? --MartynSaxman (talk) 19:53, 26 November 2012

Sorry just to clarify, I have followed the link tl|cc-by-sa to a page relating to copyright templates and haven't got a clue what this is all about. Would be as good as to confirm that what I have added is correct? Once you have confirmed this, I will add to all my other photographs. Thanks. --MartynSaxman (talk) 20:02, 26 November 2012

Sorry about the confusion. Well, yes, about the photo usage, since an article you're editing is not just "your" article but belongs to the whole project, any image you contribute needs to conform to the project's general licensing policy, which says that Wikipedia content should be free to re-use in other contexts and for other purposes too. I see you have now added the cc-by-sa tag to your images, which means it's all fine now. The way you had tagged them previously, it seemed to be saying that you were licensing them only for Wikipedia, and that unfortunately would have meant that we couldn't keep them. I'll go and fix some details of the remaining template stuff now, if you don't mind. Thanks, – Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:08, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, yes of course and I'd also be grateful to see what it should look like for future reference. --MartynSaxman (talk) 10:55, 27 November 2012

Replaceable fair use File:Playa-de-monsul.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Playa-de-monsul.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

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 (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Lexein (talk) 07:40, 6 December 2012 (UTC)di-replaceable removed, after conversion to freely licensed. --Lexein (talk) 16:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Restored my text. It's best not to edit other people's comments --Lexein (talk) 11:05, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, I am a little confused by this uploading photographs and copyright - I do not pretend to understand American copyright law (or any for that matter). I have read the articles you suggest and to be honest, don't find them very helpful so my next course of action is to rely on you guys with experience to help. I have added this photograph which is my own, I have added a Creative Commons license, as per the suggestion of someone else, stating that I have given permission for it's use and you are still scheduling the photograph for deletion - please advise, in simple speak, what else I am supposed to do? I never thought it would be this complicated to allow your own photographs to be used to support an article! I have added the fair use template as you have request. I look forward to your guidance.

Martynsaxman (talk) 10:48, 6 December 2012 (CEST)

Hello, and thanks for asking. (I'm keeping discussion here, instead of on the image Talk page.) Yes, it's a strange situation, this divide between "free" and "non-free"; the divide is not primarily about copyright, but the license granted for use.

I hope I can clear things up. Basically, if as you say, it's your own photograph, and you're licensing it to be used freely under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0, then it's a free image, and you still own the copyright, but you're explicitly granting permission for everyone to use the image forever. (This is totally distinct from "fair use", which is a rationale for using a minimal amount of a work, even when no license or permission is granted by the copyright holder). But back to your situation:

These were the three errors you made:

• uploaded it to the Wikipedia servers where non-free content goes
• added a non-free content rationale
• added a non-free content fair use license

To fix this, you should remove the non-free related stuff, and conform the page to free content procedures, as follows:

• Move your description text to a simple ==Description== section (no template)
• Move the CC license template to just below that
• Remove the non-free use rationale template and fair use template
• Add the {{Move to Commons}} template to request that it be moved. (I'll doublecheck it after you're done)
• To help your position that this image is, and has always been, yours, do a) or b):

a) add a link on the image page to a website which you unambiguously control where the image resides, or your Flickr account, with a CC-BY-SA 1.0 license stated there, OR

b) follow the OTRS declaration steps here.

Does this help? I can jump in, but see how far you get. I'll remove the deletion template after your edits. --Lexein (talk) 11:05, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for the advice, I'll do this and let you know when I've done it. Some of the images don't actually appear anywhere else but I have a link back to my own website. Martynsaxman (talk) 12:48, 6 December 2012 (CEST)

OK, I've followed your steps, or at least I hope I have. Can you please look for me and also advise if this is what I should do for all images and also, when uploading images, which section should I upload them to? Thanks! Martynsaxman (talk) 12:48, 6 December 2012 (CEST)

Excellent start. I've completed the transformation, changing the {{Non-free use rationale 2}} with {{Information}}, added a copyright template, and verified the {{Copy to Commons}} template. It's basically good to go, but at some point, please consider either a) or b) above. Also, add categories which are appropriate for the photo (this can be tedious). One example: Category: Beaches. --Lexein (talk) 15:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

OK thanks - should I now go and apply the same to all of the images in the way that you have it set up? Martynsaxman (talk) 16:55, 6 December 2012 (CEST)

For all photos for which you own copyright, and wish to freely license, yes, go ahead. Please consider a or b above, to verify your ownership! --Lexein (talk) 16:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

OK, I've gone through all my images now - do I need to remove the previous CC template? Martynsaxman (talk) 20:39, 6 December 2012 (CEST)

• Just sticking my oar in. would it not have been easier to upload the images direct to the commons, catorgorise them with existing images of the same places then they can be brought back. Of course they could then be used on any wikipedia of any language. Most of your images already have an equivalent on the commons so you can never guarantee your images will be used especially if it is thought of as advertising. I created San José (Almeria) from it's spanish page hoping the non cited sources there could be cited on the english version but it does read a bit like a tourist brochure. REVUpminster (talk) 18:57, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I uploaded the images in ignorance - although I read the guidance notes I don't find them easy to understand and so the way I uploaded the files, reflects my understanding of the guidance notes. Thanks to Lexein, I now have a better understanding of how the system works. As for the article on San José, there were sectional headings left empty with an invitation that read - "This section is empty. You can help by adding to it. (November 2012)" I live in San José and have lots of information about the place and lots of photographs that show defining features of the surrounding areas. Previous photographs I feel inadequately showed this. I'm developing the article to the best of my ability and trying to give all the information I can, objectively about the town. Of course if anyone has any more information and wishes to develop the article further, then they should include this rather than.

Martynsaxman (talk) 21:17, 8 December 2012 (CEST)

• I left those two sections blank because there was no cites on the spanish version es:San José (Almería) but if you can verify the history and it does not have to be from the internet. If from a book just quote the book title, isb number, and it's page no. The english article goes wrong in the first line with the expression "very beautiful" which is subjective from an encyclopedic point of view. From a personal point of view it might be right and if i can convince the wife I want to go to Almeria and visit Texas Hollywood and now San José.REVUpminster (talk) 21:24, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I have changed what I'd originally written as on re-reading, it looked a bit terse, so apologies if I have offended, it wasn't my intention. With respect to the history, I am still looking at that part of it. As for the description of San José, sorry but the description "very beautiful" is absolutely relevant and if you knew anything about San José you would understand this.

Martynsaxman (talk) 15:17, 9 December 2012 (CEST)

File permission problem with File:Cala-de-la-media-luna.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Cala-de-la-media-luna.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi there,

As I see it, I've complied with the conditions relating to permissions for images, copyright for images and the Creative Commons licensing so many times in response to so many peoples interpretation and enforcement of "the rules". The last conversation I had about this very same subject I corrected my image information and the person commenting (see details above) was eventually satisfied. I then, with their agreement & guidance, applied the same changes to ALL of my images I have used on all articles so in this respect, I fail to see why I have fallen short of the regulations yet again. Please advise in plain English and without pointing me to a set of ambiguous guidelines. Thank you.

Martynsaxman (talk) 20:30, 23 January 2013 (CEST)

If it's your image say so :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

But I have said this, almost until I'm blue in the face!

Martynsaxman (talk) 21:17, 23 January 2013 (CEST)

Hi there,

Any up date on this? I had a notification that there were further comments but these comments don't seem to appear. Just to confirm my position - I've updated tags on all my images so many times in accordance with how people have advised me. If you are offering further advice, please make it clear what this advice is i.e. tell me rather than point me to an ambiguous help page :-) Thank you.

Martynsaxman (talk) 07.55, 2 February 2013 (CEST)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)