User talk:ACP2011/Archive 13

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi Anne! I wanted to come by and award you with the grandest barnstar of them all - the Original Barnstar - for all of your awesome work on Wikipedia!! I love checking out your contributions, and your tireless effort to help share history, culture and knowledge on the world's biggest Wikipedia is wonderful. THANK YOU! Sarah (talk ) 19:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Sarah. Anne (talk) 19:33, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the Lancaster Monument in East Sheen Cemetery, see Commons:Commons:Geograph Britain and Ireland — a database of nearly two million images from throughout the UK has been uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons, so there's a decent chance that this monument would be included in a photograph in the collection. Nyttend (talk) 02:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC) Thank you for the tip. I was able to register with geograph. I found East Sheen Cemetery. There weren't any photos of the Lancaster Monument but geograph will be a wonderful resource in the future. And I already found a photo that I can use in one of the articles that I wrote last week! Anne (talk) 03:49, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I read this morning, I believe somewhere in the DYK pages, that information written in list form is not counted as "prose." A large portion of my article for Sydney March, the majority of his career section, is written in list form. Is this unwise? I wanted to give an adequate representation of the prolific nature of his work, but still keep things tidy and easy to read. Each entry is anywhere from a sentence to a paragraph in length, and the entries are listed in chronological order where I've been able to find the date of the piece. There are a few pieces of his work, such as the Bromley War Memorial and the Bromley Parish Church Memorial, where, as I keep digging, I'm able to find enough information to create an article in its own right. Should I rewrite the career section for Sydney? If so, what format should I use? Thank you. (Right now I'm in the middle of finishing revising all the references for Elsie and Sydney March, but I'd be happy to rewrite Sydney's article.) Anne (talk) 12:55, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

We have articles on Elsie, Sydney and Vernon March, but not on any of the other March artistic siblings, and I have not found any information on them here at the Free Library of Philadelphia, but perhaps you may have found information about them elsewhere. I must admit that I have not checked all the references in the existing articles. My very first creation on Wikipedia was March (surname), and ever since I have been very alert for more people to add to that disambiguation page. Please let me know if you or I could create articles on the other siblings, or alternatively, a family page if the information available is brief.--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:32, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Good Morning. I first became interested in the March family last month, when I created the article on the Diamond War Memorial. I eventually realized that I had enough material to create articles for Elsie and Sydney. After that, I figured I might as well expand the stub on Vernon March that someone else had already started; so now it's article length and I finished all three articles just a few days ago, although I'm still upgrading the references for Elsie and Sydney to conform with Wikipedia standards. (I'm still pretty new.) With all this research, I'm still having a hard time finding information on the rest of the brothers. However, I could probably create a family page. I like your idea. I haven't seen a family page on Wikipedia before, but I've never looked. What do you think of the idea of including all nine siblings, with brief references to the articles on Sydney, Elsie, and Vernon, and concentrating on the remaining siblings? I'll bet I could put together a paragraph on each, maybe even make each of the other siblings a separate section. Thank you. Anne (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

You may be new, but you are doing very good work, in proper Wikipedia style and format, and with very good inline citations, which is not an easy skill to acquire. I can provide a number of family article references, but they may not be very helpful. Consider Clayton family or Biddle family as examples. I know I have seen family articles starting with a description of perhaps the parents or grandparents, followed by short paragraphs on the less well known, and links to full articles on the better known. Let me have some time to look for better examples for what we might accomplish, and meanwhile you can research the artistic Marches. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:40, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Excellent! Thank you. Anne (talk) 16:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

You should consider using a Wikipedia:User pages or sandbox to create the new article on the March siblings, and then move or copy it to the regular mainspace. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:49, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, someone recommended a few weeks ago that I do that with all the articles that I create. Apparently, one is less likely to be interrupted if you write in sandbox or user space. The other trick that was recommended, and that I sometimes forget, is to use the template for inuse. Anne (talk) 02:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

If you create a polished article with inline citations in your user talk space and then move it to the mainspace, you are far less likely to draw unwanted and sometimes unfriendly attention. In this case, I can comment on the article before you move it. Sometimes I even create an article with a text editor, and then put it in my user space. This is especially good for a series of articles on like subjects, such as Speakers of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, which share a common format. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

That's interesting. I'd never heard of creating an article in user talk space. Anne (talk) 13:35, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Look at User talk:Dthomsen8/March family as a very preliminary first draft, created in my talk space. It was necessary to put (artist) after some names to prevent a Wikilink to an unrelated March. The eight sections below the introduction provide either an opportunity to add a brief item on the artist, or a link to an article in full, such as you already created for the three sculptors. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

It is conventional to answer talk page entries with indenting, done by adding a colon (":") or multiple colons. If the discussion gets too far to the right, then the outdent can be used to bring it back to the left, with an arrow. {{Outdent|:::::::}} is an example of the outdent template. I added indenting to the section above for you, and an outdent just for illustration, normally it would be five or six indents in, not just three. --DThomsen8 (talk) 20:56, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm sure there's a number of basic conventions that I'm not following, but hopefully people will keep bringing them to my attention. Anne (talk) 23:27, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Good morning Anne. In that case I wiil point out that it is Wikipedia house style to use capitals for proper nouns only in section headings. Over at the dark side (Conservapedia) they like to use capitals for every word and we would not want to be confused with them.--Charles (talk) 07:35, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

That's interesting. I wonder whether that's a European convention. As I've been researching, I've occasionally noticed recently a book or article from Europe with only the first word capitalized. And I didn't even realize that there was such a thing as Conservapedia. Thank you. Anne (talk) 12:29, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Welcome to the second edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

• Teahouse celebrates one month of being open! This first month has drawn a lot of community interest to the Teahouse. Hosts & community members have been working with the project team to improve the project in many ways including creating scripts to make inviting easier, exploring mediation processes for troubling guests, and best practices regarding mentoring for new editors who visit the Teahouse.

• First month metrics report an average of 30 new editors visiting the Teahouse each week. Approximately 30 new editors participate in the Teahouse each week, by way of asking questions and making guest profiles. An average of six new questions and four new profiles are made each day. We'd love to hear your ideas about how we can spread the word about the Teahouse to more new editors.
• Teahouse has many regulars. Like any great teahouse, our Teahouse has a 61% return rate of guests, who come back to ask additional questions and to also help answer others' questions. Return guests cite the speedy response rate of hosts and the friendly, easy to understand responses by the hosts and other participants as the main reasons for coming back for another cup o' tea!
• Early metrics on retention. It's still too early to draw conclusions about the Teahouse's impact on new editor retention, but, early data shows that 38% of new editors who participate at the Teahouse are still actively editing Wikipedia 2-4 weeks later, this is compared with 7% from a control group of uninvited new editors who showed similar first day editing activity. Additional metrics can be found on the Teahouse metrics page.
• Nine new hosts welcomed to the Teahouse. Nine new hosts have been welcomed to the Teahouse during month one:
  Mono, Tony1, Worm That Turned, Writ Keeper, and Nathan2055
  . Welcome to the Teahouse gang, folks!
• Say hello to the new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, as being welcomed by experienced editors is a really nice way to make new editors feel welcome.

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username

The Canadians apparently did this because they felt allegiance to the British Empire. Therefore, as I see it, there are actually three possible correct answers to your question: King George V; the British Empire; or King George V of the British Empire. I must confess I have used all three on occasion, and thus I am probably the source of your confusion.

Just to make the situation even murkier and trickier, there are three other considerations.

First, a sizeable number of Americans sneaked across the border to join the Canadian military. They were not usually required to swear allegiance to the King because American law said that by so doing, it would cost them their American citizenship. Some few of them, like Frederick Libby, ignored that rule and swore allegiance to the King anyhow. It does not seem to have affected their citizenship, as the law does not seem to have been enforced.

Secondly, a sizeable minority of Canadians relocated to the USA postwar. Some became naturalized Americans; some did not. I always gone with the sources and have designated them as Canadians unless I found proof they naturalized.

Thirdly, some few Canadians were born in the US to Canadian parents. Again, I have depended upon the sources.

By now, your head is probably whirling, so let me end with the only simple observation I can make on this subject. Wikipedia is self-correcting. If you are wrong, some other editor–probably Canadian–will straighten it out.

I hope this has been of help to you. I would like to end by thanking you for creating Arras Flying Services Memorial; this article has been needed for years.

Georgejdorner (talk) 21:56, 6 April 2012 (UTC) George, thanks so much for the answer. I had a feeling that the matter wasn't going to be simple. And you're very welcome for the Arras Flying Services Memorial. With a number of aces commemorated on it, I agree that it needed to be done. Anne (talk) 00:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Anne,

I have a template I sometimes use for victory lists. If you should want a copy, let me know. An example may be viewed at Thomas Traill.

Georgejdorner (talk) 22:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC) George, I would love a copy of the template that you use for victory lists. Anne (talk) 00:56, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Someone left me a message a couple of days ago that I need to review an article. How does one learn to review articles? Is there a specific type of article to review? Is it only articles that have been submitted for DYK? Thank you. Anne (talk) 17:06, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

There's a convention, nothing more than that, that once you have submitted a certain number of DYK nominations (I think it's five) that subsequently every time you submit a nomination you review an existing nomination that somebody else has made. That way the queue of nominations doesn't get (too) out of hand. If you want to give it a go the reviewing guide can be found at

WP:DYKR. NtheP (talk

) 18:27, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Anne (talk) 18:40, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand the criteria that some reviewers use to determine whether a source is reliable. I come from a science background and I am very familiar with the concept of evaluating sources. I worked very hard on the three articles of the sculptors of the March family-Sydney, Elsie, and Vernon-and I meticulously sourced the articles. In the case of Sydney and Elsie, I didn't know about the Wikipedia citation template until after I wrote the articles, so I went back and laboriously revised all the citations for both articles. Yet my sources are being casually dismissed as unreliable. How is the Local History and Archives Centre of Lewisham Library an unreliable source? How is British Listed Buildings which works hand in hand with English Heritage and the National Heritage List for England an unreliable source? This makes absolutely no sense. Anne (talk) 16:33, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Anne, I can't see any edits that have questioned the reliability of either source. BLB first, there's no reason why this shouldn't be considered reliable but if you have the NHLE entry use that instead, it's far less likely to be questioned as it's directly maintained by English Heritage. Lewisham Local History & Archives Centre - the issue is probably that it's user generated content, so who vouches for it's accuracy? That's my guess but you need to ask those who are questioning the reliability to get their opinion. You can always raise specific cases at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to get more opinions. NtheP (talk) 17:44, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. It's not on the talk pages for the articles themselves. Because the three are family members, many of the sources are listed in common for the three articles. It's on the nomination page for Sydney and Elsie March, with attention to Sydney. The reviewer didn't even bother with Elsie. Whenever possible I give both the English Heritage National Heritage List for England and the British Listed Building and, if I can find it, the Images of England site (also part of English Heritage). I don't understand the thinking. Sometimes a fact can be substantiated fully by one or more references individually. Sometimes by putting two or more references together. If anything, I had been worrying that I've been giving too many references. Anne (talk) 18:05, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Anne,

As I come to WP from a military intelligence and journalism background, I also have a differing view of source reliability from the WP norm. I have been informed that if the source is reliable, the information must be accurate. Author credibility is the big deal, they say. By that standard, Stephen Ambrose was gold-plated–up until he was convicted of plagairism. How that changed the accuracy of his facts, I don't know.

I've always worked from the other end of reliability, as you probably have. Cross-check any given information in any way you can to find out if it is accurate and current; if so, the source is accurate. By this standard, the Aerodrome website is highly accurate. It ought to be; it was/is compiled by such leading aviation historians as Greg Vanwyngarden and Dan-San Abbot. Those same authors, in print, are considered immaculate sources. Transfer the content of their books and/or articles to the Aerodrome website, and somehow, according to the reliability "mavens" of WP, those same facts become suspect. Go figure.

Let's face it. WP runs by consensus, which means it runs via self-appointed committees. Wrong decisions sometimes get made, and we have to accommodate them somehow. If it's any consolation to you, my experience has been that as the WP community becomes accustomed to you and you establish your reputation here, the number of folks peeking over your shoulder will taper off. Please don't become discouraged because you have to deal with vagaries of human nature in here. Your contributions are valuable and valued.

Georgejdorner (talk) 19:10, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, George. I'm with you. I am very much into cross-checking. If everything is consistent, it makes it easier. However, sometimes there are inconsistencies. Then you have to figure out what, if any, sources are accurate. Case in point: John Herbert Hedley. I started working on him yesterday and it quickly became evident that the man had a real problem with giving an accurate DOB. While day and month were always consistent, year was rarely the same twice in two documents. However, by putting it all together, I was able to confidently state that he was born in 1887. My skill set, both professionally (medical) and on an amateur basis (genealogic) involves taking a set of facts that I've uncovered and putting together a medical profile (diagnosis) or ancestral profile (family tree). I guess I'm just not accustomed to people disbelieving me, although I don't have a problem with constructive criticism. It's just that it's frustrating when you know you have good facts and you've assembled them into a credible result, and you're still not believed! Thanks for the pep talk! Anne (talk) 19:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

This is where I both agree and disagree with you. The principles of triangulation and cross checking I wholeheartedly agree with (like both of you I have to do it professionally) and there are sources that are generally reliable but I would never take anything as "gospel" unless it is cross checked by at least one other source. Where I disagree with you, solely in Wikiepdia terms, is in what to do when the sources don't agree. I think you are "wrong" in making your own deduction as that is either (or both)

verifiable and points out the reality of the situation i.e. that the truth isn't confirmed. It's very frustrating that "common sense" has to go out of the window at times but as George says WP runs by consensus with all the vagaries that can bring. DYK for one seems to have got a lot tougher on the standard of references and by the look of it a bit over zealous and/or failing to investigate for themselves before commenting adversely. NtheP (talk

) 19:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Where there is disagreement, I'm trying to mention it more often. I think I did that at least twice in the most recent article, John Herbert Hedley. Sometimes, though, there can be so many minor disagreements (example: Hedley's DOB) that it's just not worth going into detail because it could be the subject of an entire page. There's another area of disagreement, though, for Hedley, that I haven't mentioned and probably should put in the article, so I'll get going on that. Thank you.Anne (talk) 13:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

See also Aerial victory standards of World War I

Confirmed victories are numbered and listed chronologically. Unconfirmed victories are denoted by "u/c" and may or may not be listed by date.

Georgejdorner (talk) 19:21, 9 April 2012 (UTC) That's wonderful. Thank you. I'll use it for Hedley today. Great timing! Anne (talk) 19:34, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

The talk page for the aviator indicates that the article requires immediate attention and needs a photograph. I have found two since yesterday afternoon. One is promotional material that is likely from the 1928 to 1930 period. The second is a newspaper photo from 1930. I would appreciate it if someone would look at the external links I put in the article and let me know whether one or both photos could be utilized. Thank you. Anne (talk) 06:51, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Anne, I didn't see a link to the newspaper photo so can't comment on that (could you post the link here?) The publcity photo is superb - what a find! I think it might be elligible for commons using the licence {{PD-US-no notice}} - failing that I think the fair use rationale could all be met.

I think Franks has got his unit names a bit mixed up. 17th Labour Company of the Labour Corps was the name bestowed upon 12th (Labour) Battalion of the Lincolnshire Regiment when it transferred to the Labour Corps in 1917, so if he did serve with the Lincs the correct description would be that he served in 12th (Labour) Battalion, Lincolnshire Regt (later 17th Labour Company, Labour Corps). I haven't had a look at the London Gazette yet to find his original commission but it could be that he was commissioned in the the Northumberland Fusilers but transferred to the Lincs at some time - hence his MIC. NtheP (talk) 07:39, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Comcast internet went down in the middle of the night in my area, very soon after I posted on the talk page. So, when I went ahead and saved my work on the article for Hedley, the internet was down, and the Milwaukee Sentinel link and references didn't show up. I was able to save them a few minutes ago so you can take a look. I would love to be able to use all three items in the article: 1) Page one of the two page brochure, 2) photo from Milwaukee Sentinel, 3) sketch from Milwaukee Sentinel. I had one concern: the information from the University of Iowa Libraries made a reference to "educational use only." I found a ton of Hedleys in the London Gazette and was unable to find our Hedley. Should I go ahead and change the service info to what you indicated above, or wait until we've found more info? Take a look at the external links again. I think all three items (above) would be great in the article. Thanks. Anne (talk) 11:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Right, found the Milwaukee article. This could only be used, I think, under non free use and I'm not sure it adds to the article (NFCC criterion 8) as it's only reciting what you've written in the article. You could however use it as a reference to the article showing how he went on the lecture tour and how he was received etc. The brochure, I read what the UofI site said but as they don't appear to know who the copyright holder is either I still think PD-US-no notice is valid - the upload can still attibute UofI as the source.

During my lunchtime had a quick glance at the Gazette and found his original commission which was into the 26th (3rd Tyneside Irish) Battalion, Northumberland Fusiliers. I haven't found his transfer to the Lincolnshire Regt yet but for a short period in 1915 he was transferred to the Army Cyclist Corps - I don't know which battalion 8th would be the obvious one but that's a complete guess on my part. This period was so hsort I'm not sure it's even worth mentioning in the article but if I dig the references out I'll leave that decision to you. I've also found his transfer to the RFC. I'll have a deeper look tonight for his Croix de Guerre or if the Milwaukee Sentinel is correct his two CCdeG as it say he was awarded both the French and the Belgian versions. Those should both be in the Gazette - quite possibly post war as some of these decorations didn't get gazetted until as late as 1921/2.

His birth date - I've seen discussion elsewhere about his DoB and he won't have been the only one to alter it for the purposes of enlistment. The whys and wherefores of doing this are as you say, almost an article in itself. NtheP (talk) 14:43, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

What is the secret of searching the Gazette? I'm great at finding things on Ancestry and Genealogy Bank, but not so good at the Gazette. Even with your clues above, I still couldn't find the notices. So, next I used the search builder for beginners and for some reason that worked! I believe I found two issues of the Gazette, both in 1915, for 3rd Tyneside Irish and the Cyclist Corps. I put corresponding text in my article and added the two additional references. I'll keep looking for the others, after I finish up my work this afternoon. With regard to the photo issues, I want to make sure I understand. You don't think that I can use the photo and sketch (above the text) from the Milwaukee newspaper article? I thought they were pretty good. Are the photo and sketch too recent? But you do think the 1920-1930 brochure is OK with a PD-US-no notice. Thanks for your help. Anne (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The Milwaukee newspaper is obviously copyright to the paper so unless they have released their back issues under a Creative Commons licence it's at best non free use and I think it will fail to meet all the NFCC criteria because it's replaceable (criteria 1) - the phot of hedley can be found free of copyright, and it doesn't add to the context (criteria 8) as it's repeating what you say in the article as the report of a lecture. Reference it but don't use the images. The brochure is different because the copyright is less clear if there is one at all - it might lie with the Redpath Chautauqua Collection (?), if there is a copyright there isn't a free equivalent and it adds to the context because it demonstrates how he was marketing himself.

The Gazette. You need to try a lot of variations and because it's OCR text it can misread things so "John Herbert Hedley", "John H Hedley", "John H. Hedley" (note the fullstop after H). "J.H. Hedley" are all valid searches as is "J.H.Hedley" (no space). Because the OCR is sometimes flaky try the Edinburgh Gazette as well (same website) as it duplicates a lot of the info especially if there is a Scottish connection and the print quality might be good enough for something that is missed in one to be recognised in the other. This is his return to the Northumberland Fusiliers from the Cyclist Corps http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/29376/supplements/11578 This one is his promotion to temporary Captain http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/29184/supplements/5482 and this one http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/30504/supplements/1522 is his transfer to the RFC. I'm still looking for the CdeG citations. NtheP (talk) 21:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll take a look at the gazettes in a few minutes. I just finished uploading brochure photos for Hedley. The first was a minimally cropped photo of the brochure for the main article. The second was a severely cropped photo, a head shot, for the infobox. However, I ran into a little snag with both photos. I tried the template you suggested {{PD-US-no}}, but the public domain notice didn't come up. Then I tried {{PD-US-no author disclosure}} for both, but still no public domain notice. Where did I go wrong? Anne (talk) 03:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Anne,

I read your rendition of the article on Hedley. It is brilliant! I created a huge number of articles on aces, in hopes that they would be fleshed out by later editors. Your work makes me feel I did not labor in vain.

My strengths in WP lie in my researching and writing. I am a notoriously poor wiki-editor, and have never had much success dealing with photos and illustrations. Therefore, I cannot offer you any help on the photos.

The comments by NtheP are quite true. However, I can add some other additional little wrinkles to researching on the London Gazette.

1. Try a common misspelling of the name(s)–in this case, try "Headley".

2. If a RFC/RNAS/RAF ace won a domestic decoration, the "Gazette" was meticulous about including the honor in post-award notices. This does not seem to apply in Hedley's case. However, (to posit a hypothetical case for example), if you are searching for info on someone with a name like John Smith, knowing that he won the DSO could really cut through the bumf. Entering "John Smith DSO" in the advanced search page could sort through the John Smiths, for instance. In the case of more complex names, say (again hypothetically) "Hubert Cecil Ricketts-Jones", entering "Ricketts-Jones DSO" may bring up pages otherwise not available.

3. If you have a subject's regimental number, you may occasionally be able to turn up pages otherwise not available. However, you have to be cautious with this, as the British and Commonwealth armed forces issued duplicate numbers and/or recycled numbers.

4. Flight magazine sometimes reprinted notices from the Gazette. It may be found at http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/index.html. Dealing with this site can be a whole other set of problems; if and when you wish advice on searching this site, I shall happily share what I know. It has its own little quirks.

5. Google search occasionally gives access to Gazette articles that otherwise do not show up elsewhere.

I add one more concern that behooves caution. Although Hedley does not seem to fall into this category because he was transferred to the RFC, many officers kept their commissions in their ground units while picking up a second commission while seconded to the RFC. Thus, (another hypo here) John Jones might be a

I have discovered more research tricks than these, but will reserve them until you request them, as I do not want to overload you. Georgejdorner (talk) 06:59, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the compliment! I think I've enjoyed writing this article the most since I started with Wikipedia in February. The more I looked, the more I found. I apparently had developed amnesia and forgotten for a couple of days that I had a Genealogy Bank subscription. I hadn't used it recently because, until Hedley, everyone lived and died in Europe. When I looked for Hedley on Genealogy Bank, I ended up with more newspaper articles than I even needed! This guy was quite a character! I rewrote the first paragraph of military career early this morning when I had a few minutes, to make it flow better. Thanks for all your tips on the Gazette and FlightGlobal. I've been wondering: Why do so many of the Gazette notices indicate that a rank is temporary? Sometimes a whole page will be temporary ranks. Thank you. Anne (talk) 01:31, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

• Don't go into the route that is British army ranks! You have substantive, war substantive (Second World War mostly), temporary,
  acting and brevet (see Military rank#Types of rank). Take Peter Young the historian and founder of the Sealed Knot. He ended the Second World War as a substantive Lieutenant, a war substantive Lt Colonel and a temporary Brigadier and he wasn't an unusual case. You will see loads of temporary and acting gazette entries either because of the nature of the appointment or dead men's shoes and frequent notifications of "Lt (A/Capt) X to be T/Capt while . . ." During the war there won't be many brevet appointments but the acting and temporary were very common. NtheP (talk
  ) 08:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Wow! This whole rank thing is crazy complicated! Thank you. Anne (talk) 11:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Anne, sorry should have said PD-US-no notice is a Commons licence tag not an en:WP one, on the basis that free files are better uploaded to Commons. If you want to upload to WP only the appropriate template would probably be {{

PD-Pre1978}}. On the Gazette front "e" is often poorly intepretted throught the OCR so try "Hadley" or "Hodley". The other tip I'd offer up at the momment is that the Gazette's use of English is very, very formal so you will see punctuation like D.S.O., and that can affect search results so sometimes it's worth trying to search for "Hedley," as well as "Hedley". NtheP (talk

) 07:44, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks. I didn't realize that it was a Wikimedia license, not a Wikipedia. I've only uploaded a few photos, and only to Wikipedia, because I still haven't figure out how to upload to Wikimedia. Thanks again for all your help on the Gazette and Hedley's appointments. I've included it all in the article. I think this one could be fun for a DYK nom, although with the way it's been the last week, it'll probably get turned down! Anne (talk) 01:51, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Anne,

I must join the chorus of non-comprehension when it comes to the rats nest of British military rank designations. I am used to the brute simplicity of the American rank structure. Even at our most complex, we never progressed beyond the use of brevet ranks, a la "General" George Armstrong Custer. The only things I cling to in my articles about British/Commonwealth aces are these:

1. The distinction between the position of

Oh, and NtheP forgot to mention probationary ranks. In fact, I have found numerous examples of fliers having a temporary probationary rank. Erk. Georgejdorner (talk) 16:46, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. It really does seem incomprehensible. And I have noticed the probationary designation as well. I don't know how anyone make sense of all this! Anne (talk) 16:52, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I have reviewed the DYK nomination for your Bromley war memorial articles and though in general they are good articles, there are certain problems regarding close paraphrasing which you need to deal with. A useful essay on the subject can be found here. It is always difficult striking a balance between giving as much information as possible in an article and copying the original source too closely. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:42, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your review. It's early here in the Chicago area, so I'll be able to immediately go ahead and review both articles and rewrite any sentences or sections with wording that is too close to my original sources. Anne (talk) 11:30, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Melville Waddington article needs templates on the talk page. Perhaps you can cut and paste from earlier flyer talk pages for this one, while I go off to my Saturday breakfast date. I will mark the article reviewed after lunch. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:07, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I'm not sure what "templates on the talk page" means. However, as soon as I'm finished revising my Bromley memorial articles, I'll try to figure it out. I had thought that those little notices on article talk pages were put there by reviewers. Thank you. Anne (talk) 12:19, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I took a look at the first article that I worked on in late Feb, also an ace, Lionel Ashfield. There were three WikiProject notices, for Biography, Military History, and Aviation. I assumed that those were the templates to which you were referring, and I was able to create them. I also tried to duplicate the little "banner" above the three templates, but was less successful. Please let me know whether there's another template that I should add. Thank you. Anne (talk) 15:01, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

To keep you going, while working on Wikipedia articles. DThomsen8 (talk) 12:09, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Anne (talk) 12:13, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Could you please check it now please?? the DYK... thank you and sorry if I'm bothering you. I now put the blog as the source and modified the lifeboat thing. And as for source 4 there could be an ALT, I'll put it right now. Nienk (talk) 12:17, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Orlady (talk) 00:07, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Orlady (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I did a mini review of the article yesterday, nothing formal, because of my interest in World War I. I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia and I've been writing articles related to WWI flying aces, their cemeteries and monuments, and the designers/sculptors of those cemeteries and monuments. I realized yesterday that before the

War Memorials in Monmouth article, there was very little on Wikipedia relating to Monmouth memorials. So, I chose two that I thought would lend themselves to individual articles and proceeded. What surprised me, however, was the small amount of information on the internet related to Monmouth monuments. In England, the National Heritage List for England facilitates research. While British Listed Buildings is available for Wales, there is actually very little information on the BLB site for Wales monuments. I'll be happy to cross link the articles. I didn't know there was any such thing as points and prizes on Wikipedia. I'm still learning my way around the site. I'll try to find the Charles Rolls Challenge today. Right now I'm writing an article on the Livesey Hall War Memorial. Thanks again. Anne (talk

) 11:28, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Anne, sorted. I know you used the reuse information from Geograph but that is slightly wrong as it doesn't link the |permission= to a template. I've replaced Creative Commons Attribution Share-alike license 2.0 with {{Cc-by-sa-2.0|Copyright David Anstiss and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence}} to give the template and suggested attribution. NtheP (talk) 14:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I initially tried to upload it to Wikimedia this morning, but I couldn't find a section to transfer the entire set of info from Geograph that I was trying to copy and paste. So, I went back to Wikipedia and copied and pasted, initially forgetting two little brackets. After I took care of that, I thought it was OK. This photo thing still confuses me. Anne (talk) 14:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

It does me too, so I'm always double and triple checking every upload I make very carefully. One day I'll get one right first time! NtheP (talk) 15:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Monmouth Regimental Museum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Territorial Army

War Memorial of the Royal Monmouthshire Royal Engineers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Henry V

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I am participating in the MonmouthpediA project. I have been requested to provide some links to other Monmouth articles. I am of course familiar with internal links and external links. And I'll be able to take care of some of the links with just routine internal links. However, where on the page does one link to other articles that wouldn't naturally be part of the text? Is there a convention something along the lines of "please see the articles on ....?" Thank you. Anne (talk) 13:33, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

This photo of John Browning seems that it would qualify as public domain. He's listed on the page as being born in 1835, but he may have been born as early as 1830. Therefore, this image was from the mid to late 1800's. There's no information on the photographer. Would you agree that this would be public domain? Thank you. Anne (talk) 06:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:John Browning 1.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

My DYK is 5x expanded. SL93 (talk) 23:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Orlady (talk) 00:04, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you. I responded at DYK earlier this morning. Anne (talk) 15:54, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I have suggested an alternative hook for your DYK nomination of George Hubert Kemp because the image you put forward is ineligible because it is not included in the article, a requirement for DYK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you. I responded at DYK earlier this morning. Anne (talk) 15:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For a newbie editor who has written an amazing number of new articles on an incredible number of topics. DThomsen8 (talk) 15:43, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Anne (talk) 15:51, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm aware that the photos for WWI aces are public domain. Those I obtained through Ancestry. As a corollary to that, would original apprenticeship papers from the 1700's, also found on Ancestry, also be considered public domain? Thank you. Anne (talk) 21:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC) And, if public domain, what type of license template would I use? Thank you Anne (talk) 00:53, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Copyright in the United States is 75 years after the death of the author or photographer. Public records are sometimes public domain (all US Government), and sometimes not. The apprenticeship papers of more than two centuries ago must be public domain by now, but perhaps someone else has a different interpretation. Obviously Ancestry.com is publishing this material by making electronic copies of the original papers. Any others have an idea?--DThomsen8 (talk) 01:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I would definitely be interested in what anyone else has to say about the matter. I think these apprenticeship papers from the 1700's are a great find and I'd love to be able to use them in some articles, one of which I've just been writing the past couple of days. Anne (talk) 01:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC) Another question associated with my last two articles on instrument makers: What is the secret of having a logo show up in the info box? I already uploaded the logo. (Apparently, the special upload for logos is only for those still with copyright issues and where use is limited.) I've tried several ways to code the info, but the logo won't show up in the info box. Thanks Anne (talk) 03:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

1. Anne, I agree that the indentures are out of copyright. The only issue might be who owns the copyright on the image.
2. If the article was Spencer, Browning & Rust, I've moved the logo into the infobox. One of the things I've found over the years in inconsistency in templates about how to format images within them. The template page itself should give guidance but sometimes it can be trial error to find out if it's filename foo.png or linked filename [[foo.png]] or linked filename with file prefix [[file:foo.png]] , let alone is the size included in this line or as a separate line. NtheP (talk) 09:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Images can be in English Wikipedia, but it is better to put them in Wikimedia Commons, especially if they might be used in other language Wikis. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

• (a) Thanks so much. I though that I had tried that combo, but I must have missed it. It looks great. I also added a logo caption. I started uploading to Wikipedia in March and last week started uploading to Wikimedia. But I've been scared off from Wikimedia because several times I've received the message "internal error" when I'm on the very last step of a Wikimedia upload, after already doing the initial upload and putting in all the photo information. At that point, when I try to upload again it won't let me and keeps giving me the message that there is a duplicate image. Somewhat annoying. I've never received one of those messages when uploading to Wikipedia. Is that a known problem with Wikimedia? How do people deal with it?

(b) With regard to #1 above, are you indicating that Ancestry might own the copyright to the apprenticeship papers images? Is it different from the images the company has taken of the photos of flying aces? Thank you. Anne (talk) 13:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

a) have you checked you commons contribution commons contribution list to check that the image hasn't uploaded before you got the error message? This would probably explain a subsequent duplicate image message (incidentally I typed this before I saw a reply to you comment at commons:Commons:Upload Wizard feedback which says the same, the error comes after the file has uploaded).

b) No I've thought about it, no I'm not. We know Ancestry didn't take the photos for the RAeroClub, just scanned them for reproduction on the net, so why should a photo of some indentures be any different? NtheP (talk)

Thank you. The internal error message always comes at the very last step, after initial upload, after the first page of info is typed, and after the second page of final description is typed, right before one is supposed to receive the URL and name of the photo. With regard to the other issue, I'm leaning toward thinking that the images are public domain. How do you think I should handle it? I wouldn't even know what kind of license template to use. Anne (talk) 15:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I think the commons template PD-old would suffice. NtheP (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. So it would look like this?

This file is in the public domain because its copyright has expired in the United States and those countries with a copyright term of no more than the life of the author plus 100 years. Public domain //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ACP2011/Archive_13

Anne (talk) 16:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Did you know we have an

No, I did not. Thanks for the tip! Good timing! I was planning on just doing a tiny stub for orillon, but decided this afternoon to take it to start class. I'm just winding it up now. Anne (talk) 23:34, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Started this. Please help improve by finding reliable sources about the roads and photographs.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:43, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll be happy to help. Anne (talk) 13:49, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

It should be a chance to shine as most of the roads, especially those mentioned should have a few sources about the roads themselves. If you want more roads look on google maps or see the list hidden in Template:Streets in Gibraltar. I think I've mentioned most of the most notable ones to start with anyway. Superb work on Flat Bastion Magazine too, love some of the photos of it too!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:52, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I think the streets article is a great idea, particularly given what's transpired recently. Anne (talk) 14:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Re-edit as you deem appropriate. If it is your attention to fully develop it before the deadline of course. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

nominate ) 08:01, 13 October 2012 (UTC) Trafalgar Cemetery challenge This Sunday is the Battle of Trafalgar commemoration day - there will be an annual commemoration event in Trafalgar Cemetery in Gib. It would be great if we could get a 5x expansion done in time for the article to be ready for DYK for that day. Could you see what you can do with it? Prioryman (talk) 23:37, 16 October 2012 (UTC) Great idea! Let me make it my project for tomorrow and then you can take a look at it and see what you'd like to change or add. By the way, when I first saw your note a couple of minutes ago, I thought you were referring to the Battle of Trafalgar, which I quickly learned was already a huge article. I had already been contemplating a week or two ago an expansion of the cemetery, not aware of the timing. This will work out great. I finished an article a few minutes ago. I'm just about to add categories to Princess Amelia's Battery. Anne (talk) 23:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC) Thanks Anne, I've nominated your three Princesses for DYK as a single hook - see Template:Did you know nominations/Princess Caroline's Battery. I took a bunch of pictures in the cemetery the weekend before last so I'll contribute those too. Prioryman (talk) 01:20, 17 October 2012 (UTC) Thank you! And I noticed a few hours ago that you had nominated Gibraltar Cross of Sacrifice and Gibraltar 2. That's great! I'll get that Trafalgar Cemetery expansion done tomorrow and it sounds like we'll be in good shape for photos. Anne (talk) 02:04, 17 October 2012 (UTC) Great job once again! You're well past 5x now (closer to 9x, I would say). I've nominated the article and requested a fast-track review so that, hopefully, it'll appear on Trafalgar Day. Prioryman (talk) 06:56, 18 October 2012 (UTC) Thank you! Anne (talk) 14:30, 18 October 2012 (UTC) O'Hara's Hi Anne, great job on the Tower and Battery, thanks! I see you've also started it's twin battery Lord Airey's Battery. The nearby Breakneck Battery and Spur Battery also mounted 9.2 inch guns. The latter was found to be in such good shape in the 80s that it was unfortunately dismounted and taken away to one of the Imperial War Museums in the UK... --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 22:46, 22 October 2012 (UTC) Thanks! I've found some good info for Spur Battery, but not that much yet for Breakneck Battery. I'm still researching it to see whether I can come up with enough for an article. Anne (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Fortifications of Gibraltar I just thought I'd let you know that I'm planning to start a piece on the Fortifications of Gibraltar – they were really my main focus of interest when I visited, with Clive Finlayson's eponymous book serving as a guide. Hopefully I won't be treading on any toes as the article is still a red link. I'd definitely like to draw on your awesome research skills, so be warned. ;-) Prioryman (talk) 00:20, 25 October 2012 (UTC) I thought that you were planning on doing one, because of the red links in info boxes. Accordingly, I've been putting that red link in my info boxes, too, and have even put some in the text in the occasional article. So, you should be good. That'll be a great article. Probably very big. I'll be happy to help. I'll also keep plugging away on the individual fortifications, which should be helpful with the big article. Anne (talk) 00:31, 25 October 2012 (UTC) Hi Prioryman, see Royal Calpe Hunt. Cheers, --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 11:26, 25 October 2012 (UTC) I passed out early yesterday evening after a busy day, and thought I was speaking to you when it was really Prioryman. Do either of you know how far the other contributor is with regard to his Hunt article? I'm about 80% complete. (I'm aiming for a C level article.) Also, as I mentioned above, I'll keep plugging away on individual fortifications and then I can help with your big article by composing summaries of my small ones. If you'd like, I can start doing that this week. Thanks. Anne (talk) 12:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC) Prioryman is the one who also wants to work on the Hunt. I don't think he's made a start though. --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 22:42, 25 October 2012 (UTC) Thanks. I just left him a message. Give me a holler when you want to actually start the process of writing text for the fortifications article. I'll start writing little summaries of my articles when you're ready to start the text of the main article. Anne (talk) 23:32, 25 October 2012 (UTC) Prioryman hasn't replied yet, but just go for it Anne. I was thinking of having it as an overview article on the general fortifications of The Rock explaining the changes through the ages. But I guess the more info the better, just need to figure out how best to structure it. I leave it up to you how you want to start :). By the way I'm in Barcelona for a week and won't be too active. --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 18:49, 28 October 2012 (UTC) Gibraltar Articles Hi Anne, just wanted to say Hi and to thank you for all the articles you have been writing on Gibraltar! I am new to wiki but as a local who is interested in Gibraltar history I am keen to learn how to edit so that I can help contribute. If you need any photos I am more than happy to help by going out and taking them. Speak to you soon Tommy Toromedia (talk) 19:21, 29 October 2012 (UTC) Hi, Tommy. Welcome to Wikipedia! I've been enjoying writing the articles. And thank you for volunteering to obtain photos. I may take you up on that. When you start writing articles, let me know. I can help you with your editing. I just started contributing to Wikipedia this year, so I know that it can be a little tricky at the beginning. You'll find, though, that there will be plenty of people to help you with your articles! Anne (talk) 19:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC) DYK for Royal Gibraltar Yacht Club 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.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC) You might find more on Coaling Island.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC) Thank you. I'll try to expand it this week. Anne (talk) 18:43, 3 November 2012 (UTC) Re: Signal gun I think you're right in guessing it's a typo which should read "single gun"... If we'd be talking about the Signal Station, Gibraltar next to the Gibraltar Cable Car station it may have made some sense! --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 12:43, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Thank you. Anne (talk) 13:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Gibraltar Caving Group Hi Anne, the article says its the only caving group in Gibraltar, but I'm guessing the source is outdated as the Museum now have their own Caving Unit (see here) which is surveying Gib's caves. They've just started a website where they hope to write on all the major caving systems in Gib. Good article by the way. It's nice to read these smaller articles as blue links in main articles such as Operation Tracer :) --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 12:56, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Thank you! I will read the new sources and update the article immediately! Anne (talk) 13:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks Hi Anne Just wanted to say thanks for all the work you've put into Gibraltar related articles, I've recently been uploading a lot of photos, if you've looked for something recently and haven't found it I may have uploaded it, lots more to come too. Also I'm working on some 3d things too like this one, if you have any suggestions of things I could try to do please let me know. -- talk ) 17:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC) You're very welcome. I've run into a snag recently where my articles and especially photos, most from Jim Crone's fantastic website, are being targeted for deletion. Do you think that there's any chance that Mr. Crone might clarify the license for photos? There seem to be too main issues: 1) The powers-that-be are apparently unhappy with his wording in that he mentions GibraltarpediA. They take it to mean that the photos are only for GibraltarpediA and, therefore, aren't satisfied with the license. 2) The second issue is the photos that he's released for which is he too young to have personally photographed, for example, Operation Tracer, Gibraltar, that I haven't moved to article space yet. After that's completed, I'll be happy to go through photos that you've uploaded. I just received news from Roger the other day that a number of other photos of mine had been deleted. I'm not sure how to tell exactly which, because I don't keep a running list of photos that I've uploaded. Other than uploading photos, I'm not that great at navigating Wikimedia. There's probably some easy way to see a list of what I've uploaded since I started this year. Thanks again. Anne (talk ) 17:27, 19 November 2012 (UTC) I have a special request, but I don't know whether you'll be able to fill it. I recently (last week) wrote an article on the Operation Tracer, Gibraltar, they also featured prominently. Is there any way that we could snag a photo of the four men of the group who discovered Stay Behind Cave? Or perhaps there is one out there already that the group or the Gibraltar Museum could make available to us? Thank you. Anne (talk ) 22:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC) Hi Anne where is this debate about Jim Crone's site taking place? I thought this had gone away. It doesn't matter if Jim gives the images "just?" to Gibraltarpedia - as he does that with a cc=by-sa license. cc-by-sa means anyone can use it without asking for permission and no one can claim ownership. This would mean that people who gave images to Wikipedia under a cc by sa license should also make it clear thatthey are not just giving it to Wikipedia??? That is obviously not required. If necessary we can get Jim to re-say what he has already said - but we do need the form of words agreeing first. So could you point me at the debate? I agree that Jim does need to show that he has the licenses to older images. Victuallers (talk) 22:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC) The debate is very active, as many of my images are being targeted. Take a look here and you'll be able to see some of the conversation. It would be great if Jim could do something to show he has the right to the older images, too. Thank you. Anne (talk) 22:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC) Hi Anne I emailed Jim Crone and he has changed the text at DiscoverGibraltar.org to make it clear that is isnt just?? "for gibraltarpedia". I noticed that the nice green battery panorama was deleted. I have requested "undeletion" with the followig message This is one of dozens of files loaded from DiscoverGibraltar.org. This site has been released by the ownwe with a cc by sa licence. The wording of the license was objected to. The wording has been corrected. If you go to discovergibraltar.org then the whole site (apart from identified sections) are released under cc by sa. This is what our mission wants us to do! We are releasing whole web sites. Please help and undelete this image. I have written to the original supplier of the black and white "vitello" images to get him to confirm that these are free too. We suspect crown copyright but need proof). Thanks for listening Where can I lodge complaints about some of the images that are being deleted? It's not sufficient to request correction from the people doing the deleting, because their errors are being pointed out before the actual deletion. What administrator do I contact? I think some of these people should lose the right to delete images. They are abusing the privilege. Anne (talk) 22:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC) There is no abuse as every single image can be restored. If you have specific complaints or need a specific piece of advice you can contact me either in here or in commons. Best regards --Ecemaml (talk) 20:55, 23 November 2012 (UTC) Thank you. Anne (talk) 23:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC) Jin says he has not got proof of permission for Bruce Cooper B&W images. I think we have to lose these. You could save one under "fair use" I think but only on the Bruce Cooper article. All the colour pictures are cc by sa and can be used freely. I hope that helps. Victuallers (talk) 21:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC) The panorama image for Green's Lodge Battery has been undeleted this afternoon. One of the black and white targeted images for Bruce Cooper I used for my DYK hook. I don't know anything about fair use. How does that work? What does the license code look like? In what circumstances can you use it? Thank you. Anne (talk) 23:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Hi Anne, just spent some time creating this. it doesn't solve the problem but it does put all the issues in one place. My understanding is that all the colour pictures in this category were taken by Jim Crone and he has released these low definition pictures to us. The black and white pictures came from a local historian. I'm trying to get formal permission but Id avoid using them in important places in new articles. Let me try and explain the term "fair use". This is a legal device that allows people to be pictured holding a book or for you to be pictured in front of a film poster without ending up in court. The law says in most countries that this is "fair use" of the book image or the film poster. On wikipedia we use this to allow an article to include one low definition picture of say a CD cover where the article is about that CD. Where the article s about a person then you can load up one picture of that person to wikipedia (not commons), however you need to write a "rationale" explaining why this picture has to be used and why there is no alternative. The picture is only allowed on one article - the article about that pictured item. So "fair use" is possible .... but its not easy. You can only really use it where there is no alternative. Hope that helps. Victuallers (talk) 22:20, 22 November 2012 (UTC) I like the category that you created. And your explanation of fair use is helpful-Wikipedia, one image, one article, rationale. Thank you. Anne (talk) 09:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC) Hi Anne, see here for the guidelines. --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 10:36, 24 November 2012 (UTC) Just a quick note on fair use pictures of people. In the case of people, the most common explanation of why "there is no alternative" is that one has not been able to find an existing free image of the person, and the person is already dead. (Therefore, if a free image has not yet been taken, the person's death prevents one being taken). When people are still alive, justifying fair use is very very difficult. I also noticed that the image for talk ) 11:14, 26 November 2012 (UTC) DYK Nomination Hello! Your submission of Lord Airey's Battery at the Template:Did you know nominations/Lord Airey's Battery has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --Nizil (talk) 05:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Its permitted now :) --Nizil (talk) 17:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC) DYK for Levant Battery 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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 1 December 2012 (UTC) GibraltarpediA competition deadline approaching Dear Anne The GibraltarpediA competition deadline is fast approaching on December the 26th, thank you for all your hard work, please could you email your address using the link on the left of the screen under toolbox on my userpage so that we can send a tshirt and maybe your prizes. The response has been amazing, so far people have created over 500 new articles in 30 languages and added over 2000 new images. We are writing a press release to highlight all the hard work the contributors have made, please would you fill out your section on the contributors page, telling people why you chose to contribute to the project. Please add as much or as little personal information as you feel comfortable with, it's the motivation and hard work that is essential not what you look like or where you live although that would be nice too. Best wishes and thanks talk ) 15:35, 17 December 2012 (UTC) DYK for Operation Tracer, Gibraltar 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. Mifter (talk) 12:03, 5 January 2013 (UTC) DYK for Middle Hill, Gibraltar 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. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC) DYK for Gibraltar Caving Group 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. Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC) DYK for Godfrey Haggard 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. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 08:03, 11 April 2013 (UTC) Missed you I just noticed now that you've been back for two weeks. I guess i've just been really busy. I was rather sad when you disappeared. I'm so glad that you're back. SilverserenC 04:08, 14 April 2013 (UTC) Thank you. Everyone has been very welcoming. I was hoping that everything had reverted to normal at DYK but, to my chagrin, there is still a separate Gibraltar section (I'd still be riding the back of the bus). I'm still very interested in Gibraltar. For right now though, I'm writing about England-aristocracy, military, houses, etc. I'm probably going to stay away for the time being from photos, however. I was disappointed with the number of photos that were contested/deleted late last fall. One positive note with the Gibraltar DYK's: my perception, although it may be amiss, is that they don't seem to languish as many weeks untouched in the separate section. I hope everything is going well with you. It is a busy time of year, particularly with tax day less than two days away. And here in Chicago, it snowed much of the morning, on April 13th! Anne (talk) 04:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC) Sorry for taking so long to get back to you. And, yeah, DYK has been rather annoying. But the articles have been chugging along and I have to say that the ones you were involved in creating are model examples of good article craftsmanship. I have finals coming up in two weeks, so i've been pretty busy focusing on that and haven't had all that much time for Wikipedia this month because of it. I hope to get back into the action come May and the beginning of summer break. SilverserenC 06:48, 21 April 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the compliment and good luck with finals! Anne (talk) 12:39, 24 April 2013 (UTC) CITIPEG re-review Hi Anne, Template:Did you know nominations/CITIPEG is ready for you to re-review, if you're still up for it? Prioryman (talk) 22:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC) Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ACP2011/Archive_13&oldid=991967395"