ColinFine

Dear Colin, Re: Kaptaan OP. Thank you so much for your reply and suggestions. I am glad that you guided me in the right direction. I have changed my mind about creating a page of my company. Since I am not a professional editor, I will be deleting this account too. Wikipedia needs editors like you and not me. I am good to be a businessman and try be stick with that only, also I will work hard to find my company's page on this site someday. Thanks & Regards, Kaptaan OP

Dear Colin, Re: Kitty Gordon I've been researching her stage appearances, not her personal life - which is why the "gun accident" on a Chicago stage caught my eye. (Shooting a stagehand during a performance is a real eye-opener to a performing arts archivist!!!) Thanks, DBY

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello. I see you have marked my own page as a hoax. I do not understand this, and I am not trying to make a hoax. I have worked hard on the page and do not mean any harm. I wish to buy property in the future and make this dream into a reality. Please consider taking it off. Also, I did not notice you gave me advice, so I will read that now,

Thanks, Kaleb.catiko

Thnx for answering me on Teahouse and here's a kitten for you, enjoy sir!

UnKnownrNone (talk) 02:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

19:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Good morning Mr. ColinFine!

I hope you are doing well today sir. I am still awaiting your answer to the questions I have posed previously in The Teahouse regarding the said topic abovementioned. Basically, I would like to be clarified what you, as an editor, consider as "notable, reliable, and independent sources", as stipulated by the Wikipedia guidelines for acceptance of articles for publishing.

I have checked again and again my sources, and they certainly pass the requirements of notability, reliability, and independence. I still am perplexed as to why you and the other editor/s are insisting they are not. I have adequately explained what kind of sources they are, mostly news articles from news agencies and scholarly pieces that are highly credible and well respected up to now.

I do not want to enter into an impasse Mr. ColinFine. As I have suggested in the previous correspondence, kindly check for yourself the sources I have mentioned -- the links are all there! And if a famous person like Maria Ressa, who I forgot was also a Nobel Peace Prize Awardee in 2021, decided to interview Ms. Paat-Dahlstrom for her views on the democratization of space, isn't that enough evidence that what Paat-Dahlstrom had to say was noteworthy enough to be published in that news publication?

Also, I would

Again, I thank you and the rest of the editorial team for your time and efforts to improve on the drafts of newbies like me :).

I look forward to your pleasant reply.

Warm regards,

Eleni

P.S: I am not sure if this page is the right venue to follow up my query regarding your "guidelines". I could not answer back on the chat trail that was initially opened for the topic above. So I had to open another query on your user page. Eleniofillyria (talk) 15:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Eleniofillyria. It's OK to ask me here. I didn't see your reply at the Teahouse because you didn't ping me, so I didn't get a notification.

You seem to have misunderstood what is meant by an independent source. Your first reference, for example from GMA news online, is clearly not independent, because it is obviously based on an interview,

Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that Paat-Dahlstrom says about herself, or that her colleagues say about her - it makes no difference whether it is actually published by her or a news organisation.

If GMANews publishes an article about her that is a reporter's independent research and analysis about her, that could be an independent source. If it is merely reproducing what she says about herself, it is not. ColinFine (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sir I am facing problem in adding some images on an article because it is saying again and again that it is a 'non free image' what do now? UnKnownrNone (talk) 03:30, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, UnknownrNone. It's hard to answer questions like this when you give me no specific information at all (eg, what image were you trying to add to what article, what stage of the process were you at, how did that message come to you?)

So I can only give you general advice.

First, you understand that uploading an image and adding it to an article are two quite separate processes? I'm guessing that you had the problem when uploading, but I'm not sure.

Second, you understand that Wikimedia projects such as Wikipedia are very careful indeed about copyright, much more so than many places on the internet, and that an image cannot be used unless you are clear that its copyright permits this?

Most images you find on the internet, and most screenshots from films, videos, and games, are copyright ("non-free"), and may not be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons at all. Sometimes they can be used in a Wikipedia article under very strict limitations explained in the non-free content criteria. If all these criteria are met, then an image may be uploaded as non-free media to Wikipedia itself, and used in an article. The uploader needs to explain how the image and its use meet all the criteria.

One common use for non-free material is for covers of books, albums, games etc, in articles about the particular book, album, games etc: if that is what you are trying to do, it may be permissible. But if you are trying to include a screenshot of a game (I'm guessing what you're doing, on the basis of your user contributions), then problaby not. See WP:NFCI.

Does this help? If not, you'll need to provide more specific information. And I'm not sure quite why you asked me rather than asking at the Help desk or Teahouse, where many people would see your question and be able to answer it. ColinFine (talk) 10:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes sir, this really helped me and also thank you for that much big explanation 😊...!!

By the way sir if you don't mind, can you tell me what is a WikiGnome!? 😸 UnKnownrNone (talk) 11:33, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

To find out more about a term used in editing and participating in Wikipedia, it is usually helpful to try searching for it with WP: (short for Wikipedia: on the front.

And indeed, in this case [[WP:WikiGnome]] takes you to WP:WikiGnome, which explains all. ColinFine (talk) 13:01, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply