User talk:GrammarEnthusiast/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 7

Draft:Nahem Shoa

Hello GrammarFascist Thanks for all your help re Draft Nahem Shoa. I have just read comments by One15969 to you re: Draft Nahem Shoa. One15969 raises concerns about notability. The museums he refers to with Nahem Shoa's work in them are major Regional Art Galleries and Museums in the Uk particularly Plymouth City Museum and Art Gallery. What to do now? Arttalk1984 (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, Arttalk1984. I will be following up on Onel5969's (it's a capital I lowercase L in that username, not a number 1) suggestions and trying to find other in-depth treatments of Mr Shoa and/or his work which were not written or published by people connected with him. If you know of any print sources from the 1990s or early 2000s which are not available online, those would be extremely helpful in getting the draft to meet the notability standard and able to pass its AfC review and become a proper Wikipedia article. As for the importance of the museums which have exhibited Mr Shoa's work, I am afraid I have never lived in the UK and really have no idea how prominent any of them are. The more serious issue is the present lack of a sufficient number of in-depth articles (or passages in books, or television segments) about Nahem Shoa, so that's what I will focus on. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 18:47, 30 September 2015

There are print sources about Mr Nahem Shoa, from Plymouth's newspapers about his exhibition there, but I can't find references to them online. I think that Mr Shoa showcasing Black people in a positive way makes him notable. He has had, I believe a lot of press coverage for all his shows which are only in print form. His painting of Gbenga is in a show alongside Sir Joshua Reynold's work at this moment at Plymouth City Art Gallery and Museum In The FRAME: PLYMOUTH'S PORTRAITS, but there are no online references to Mr Shoa's work there. So how can we make use of this? Could Mr Shoa, in the worst case scenario, ie Draft is rejected be added as a wiki contributor to Mr Shoa's mentor the artist Robert Lenkiewicz's Wiki page, in some way? As you can tell I am an ignoramous regarding Wiki. Arttalk1984 (talk) 21:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

If there are print sources, Arttalk1984, those can be cited in the article. It will be challenging for whoever reviews the article to evaluate sources that are not available online, but not impossible. You should give me a list of as many such articles as you can, with author, article (or book) title, publication or publisher (e.g. The Telegraph or Oxford University Press) and publication date. I can then see if any of them are in fact available online. Alternately if you have access to copies of print sources and can scan or photograph them, you could send me the images so that I could add the information to the article. (Do not upload such images to Wikipedia or to Wikimedia Commons, however.) This could be the difference between the article failing AfC review again or finally passing. (Though articles can technically be resubmitted indefinitely, in practice reviewers come to recognize articles that have failed before and some prejudice may attach.) Please get back to me with some details ASAP. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 02:56, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I will do as you suggest Asap. For the moment, I know that there are 2 prestigious books that Shoa was invited to contribute to with his artwork. One was for Kew Gardens aissuu.com/powershift/docs/dictionary_s Info I have just found re Kew Gardens. "The Temperate House, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (as its first ...... and his Selected Engravings were Nahem SHOA 1968– Figurative artist. The other book was for Dorling Kindersley art book publishers, titled Portrait Painters, I will confirm later. How can I send you the images Re press coverage? I have found a link showing the posters of some of Shoa's exhibitions. http://nahemshoapaintings.weebly.com/links-more.html Arttalk1984 (talk) 03:59, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Arttalk1984, I have looked over the sources you listed above.

• issuu.com/powershift/docs/dictionary_s was already cited in the draft. I have added some more information to the draft cited to this source, but it does not contribute towards notability as it is not sufficiently in-depth.
• I cannot find any connection between Kew Gardens and Nahem Shoa via Google.
• "and his Selected Engravings were" does not seem to be referring to Mr Shoa (who is a painter, and not, I believe, an engraver). It seems to be a phrase referring to another artist listed in the same directory.
• There does not seem to be a Dorling Kindersley book with the title "Portrait Painters", are you certain of the title?
• I did add the Sunderland Echo and Western Morning News sources linked to from Mr Shoa's site, which had previously not been included in the article. The former is a "mere mention" and does not contribute towards notability. The Western Morning News article may contribute towards notability, but it is at least 50% interview, and interviews do not contribute towards notability.

As the AfC reviewer mentioned, what is needed are at least two more sources like the "More to Shoa for it" piece already cited, which cover Shoa and his work in depth.

To send images of print sources, should you be able to find and either scan or photograph any, you will need to upload the images somewhere other than Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia. imgur.com, photobucket.com and tinypic.com are all options for hosting the image(s). You would then post the link(s) to the image(s) in this conversation on my talk page. Then I will be able to add to the draft information from and about each new source as appropriate. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 07:09, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Asap I will try and find what you suggestArttalk1984 (talk) 07:36, 1 October 2015 (UTC) DNA and tissue banking for biodiversity and conservation: ... - Page x https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=kWVFAQAAIAAJ Vincent Savolainen - 2006 - ‎Snippet view We are very grateful to Ingrid Nanni for her invaluable contribution throughout this project; to Nahem Shoa and David Davidson for their superb artwork; to Mark Chase for his comments on the manuscripts; to Beth Lucas for her assistance with ... GrammarFascist. I have found in print form an in depth article about Shoa. "Metro" www.metro.co.uk Friday 15th 2006, "Time To Face Up" Rob Haynes Freelance journalist. I can scan the print copy in if needs be and give a link to the article. Another magazine article about Shoa was in, "Art in London" Autumn 2007, "Nahem Shoa superstar in waiting", written by Rachel Crow. Western Morning News (Plymouth) December 31st 2003, "Artistic Tribute" by Kate Dawson.

Yes, Arttalk1984, if at all possible you should scan "Time To Face Up" by Rob Haynes, "Nahem Shoa superstar in waiting" by Rachel Crow, and "Artistic Tribute" by Kate Dawson, and upload all three. Thank you for finding these print sources, something I would not be able to do as I am not in the UK. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 09:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Another article in winter 2004."Interview Nahem Shoa" was in 247 Magazine (The South West and Wales award winning free magazine).

Also: Who's who in Art - Volume 30 - Page 531 https://books.google.co.uk/books?isbn=0900083190 Bernard Dolman - 2002 - ‎Snippet view - ‎More editions Commissions: Peter Mandelson, M.P., Dr. Mary Cowling, Lady Kate Douglas, Lord Queensbury. Publications: The Amazing Aventures of Nahem Shoa, Montpelier Sandleson (l999).Arttalk1984 (talk) 08:53, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Again, interviews do not count toward establishing notability. The writeup in Who's Who is probably not sufficiently in depth, like the other artist directory.

Meeting the notability standard is the last hurdle the draft faces in terms of its AfC review. I think it would be best to avoid adding any more new sources that don't establish notability until after the draft has been promoted to an article, given the AfC reviewer's comments about having to read through many sources for verification. Let's focus on the scans for now. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 09:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Here is the link to one of the articles only in print form and not on the web. Time To Face Up by Rob Haynes in Metro Life Friday September 15 2006. I will scan the other articles as suggested. Thanks again. Arttalk1984 (talk) 19:42, 1 October 2015 (UTC) http://s736.photobucket.com/user/Language15/media/Time%20To%20Face%20Up%201_zpsrxuk2rgl.jpg.html Here are links to 3 scans Nahem Shoa A Superstar in Waiting by Rachel Crow in Art in London Magazine, Autumn 2007l http://s736.photobucket.com/user/Language15/media/A%20super%20star%20in%20waiting%201_zpsopajbfdn.jpg.html Arttalk1984 (talk) 20:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading these, Arttalk1984. There seems to be a page missing from the article in Art in London; I need the article title (even if it's just "Nahem Shoa") and the author's name. You could just type those out instead of scanning and uploading IF there's no content on the previous page besides the title and author. If the review is on that page as well, though, you should make it available to me so that I can add more quotations to the draft.

I'm working on adding content from the new sources to the draft right now; please don't edit it yourself until I'm done, to prevent an edit conflict. Thanks, GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 21:51, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Oops! I see now that the previous pages of the article are on the next scan, complete with author name and article title. I struck out what I had said about them being missing above. I was just thrown off by the pages being out of order. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 22:20, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Now thanks to your work Nahem Shoa is now an Article. What a complex yet interesting process all this has been. Thanks. Arttalk1984 (talk) 08:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

It would probably not have become an article without your participation, Arttalk1984, so don't sell yourself short. The article could still be improved, I think; in particular it would be better if there were more images of Mr Shoa's work. See Sheila Cameron (artist) for an example of another artist's article I have worked on that is much improved by the inclusion of images of both the artist and her work. (The deletion notice at the top of the page is because notability wasn't established at the draft stage like it was for the Nahem Shoa article. Same issue, different process.) It would be especially great if an image of one of Shoa's self-portraits could be used in the infobox at the top of the article.

Any images you upload must be photographs or scans you have taken yourself. Images found on the internet cannot be used. I would happily take photos of Mr Shoa's paintings myself, but I'm not in the UK.

Thank you again for working with me on this article. It has been quite interesting learning about Mr Shoa and his work. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 12:42, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

So, to clarify about images if I can go and see some of Mr Shoa's paintings in the Uk and photograph them then I can upload them?....Or maybe you could help me/explain to me how to upload them to Wiki? I think that you have done a great job in editing all the info re: Mr Shoa. The categories you have created makes for clarity in finding out about Nahem Shoa. How can the Article be translated in to other languages? Arttalk1984 (talk) 15:00, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Arttalk1984, if you photograph the paintings yourself the photos can be uploaded to Wikipedia (or better, to Wikimedia Commons) so long as you are willing to let anyone else use the photos. Uploading to Wikipedia is a relatively simple process for photos you have taken yourself. Begin by clicking "Upload file" under the "Tools" section of the sidebar at the left-hand side of any Wikipedia page. Then, for photographs you took yourself, click "Commons Wizard" and follow the on-screen instructions. Here's the one part you might find confusing:

This site requires you to provide copyright information for this work, to make sure everyone can legally reuse it.

• This file is my own work.
• This file is not my own work.

The correct answer for photos you've taken would be "This file is my own work." because you took the photo.

Now, because the photos will be of someone else's work which is still copyrighted, you will have to be sure that the photos you take can't be used as a substitute for the real thing. Note how the photo already in the article only shows the painting obliquely? That makes it perfect for representing the painting without infringing on it. Another option would be to photograph a whole wall of paintings in which one of Mr Shoa's is included, to show it in context but leave each individual painting represented at a size too small to be considered bootlegging. Another thing I think would be great to photograph for the article would be a side view of a painting, where the front of the painting isn't visible at all, but the thickness of the paint (which as I understand is up to an inch on some of Mr Shoa's portraits) can be seen.

In terms of which paintings you should try to photograph, I think Desiree would be a good choice as it's referenced by one of the critics cited in the article, and it's of a Black British woman. Photographing Desmond hanging beside the historic portrait the museum paired it with would be another good choice. Giant Head of Ben there's already a photo of so another isn't needed. Otherwise things will depend on where you're able to get to, but for any of the large-scale portraits a close-up to illustrate how at that distance the painting appears abstract would also be good, I think.

You should also be sure to comply with any regulations about photos the galleries holding the paintings may have. It may be worth calling ahead to check such policies. A museum with a no-photo policy might, however, make an exception if asked, provided you explain the purpose of the photo and how you would avoid infringing Mr Shoa's copyright. You could direct museum officials to the article with its one image as an example of how other photographs would be taken.

It would really be wonderful if you could photograph more of Mr Shoa's paintings for the benefit of Wikipedia users who can't travel to visit the works themselves. I hope it works out that you can, and I will certainly offer whatever technical assistance I can. Thank you for your kind words about my contributions to the article, but remember that it would not exist if you had not created the draft and found the essential sources. Speaking of those sources, you should delete those images from Photobucket now as we were stretching Fair Use as it was. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 19:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Continuing work on Nahem Shoa

[broken into separate section]

Regarding translation into other languages, that's a good question, and I'm going to go ask it at the Teahouse. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 19:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I have just deleted the images from Photobucket. And I shall follow your guidelines for photographing Mr Shoa's paintings. Arttalk1984 (talk) 19:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Excellent! I look forward to seeing your photos, Arttalk1984.

My inquiry at the Teahouse has yielded Category:Available translators in Wikipedia, which is a directory of users who at least sometimes translate articles either from or to English, Wikipedia to Wikipedia. Were there any particular languages you thought the article should be translated into first? Perhaps Hebrew or Russian, given Mr Shoa's heritage? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 02:57, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Spanish is one language. I have Spanish friends. Could they translate the Article? RE Photos: If I could write to Mr Shoa and ask him to grant me permission to photograph his work, could I then show the whole image straight on? Also, I may need help from you in adding a photos to the footnote section. Onel5969 left a message confirming the Article's creation and the Class it is in. Thanks. Arttalk1984 (talk) 08:59, 3 October 2015 (UTC) I was wondering how to get DYK for the Nahem Shoa article? Arttalk1984 (talk) 12:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Arttalk1984. If you have Spanish-speaking friends who could translate the article, there's nothing stopping them, though they should be sure to check the policies at Spanish Wikipedia which may be different from the English Wikipedia you have been learning. English Wikipedia has no control over what other-language Wikipedias do.

I have only ever nominated one article for Wikipedia's Did You Know? program before, but I could nominate Nahem Shoa. As a newly-created article (new articles only get 7 days to be eligible) it qualifies. Did you have a fact from the article you wanted to suggest be used? Note that the "Did you know ..." questions can't be longer than 200 characters. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 13:08, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I have read the criteria for DYK and maybe there is no fact on Nahem Shoa's page that would be appropriate? What do you suggest?Arttalk1984 (talk) 08:11, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

There's no reason to give up so soon, Arttalk1984. How about "Did you know... that portraitist Nahem Shoa increased the number of portraits of Black and mixed-race British people on display in British museums?" Or "Did you know... that some of British painter Nahem Shoa's portraits were painted at up to 15 times life size?"

Speaking of how big some of Mr Shoa's portraits are, another useful photograph for illustrating the article would be one showing a person standing next to one of the very large paintings, to indicate the scale of it. If you don't have anyone to go with you to the museum, you could always ask a stranger at the museum that day if they would mind being photographed. They could turn so their face was not visible if they preferred. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 02:41, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks you are correct I shouldn't give up. The following sentence would be good, I think? "Did you know that artist Nahem Shoa increased the number of portraits of Black and mixed-race British people on display in British museums and art galleries?" Arttalk1984 (talk) 08:56, 5 October 2015 (UTC). I have just uploaded some photos I have taken of Mr Shoa's work to Wiki Commons. I will try and add them to the appropriate sections. Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:37, 5 October 2015 (UTC) I am stuck again GrammarFascist. I have uploaded some images but I am unsure how to add them to the Nahem Shoa Article page. I have seen an image icon on the edit bar and I have copied the correct file code name from Commons Wiki. Do I just paste it in to the section, for example in to the Footnotes? I don't want to mess up your work. Arttalk1984 (talk) 11:52, 5 October 2015 (UTC) https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=Nahem+Shoa&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go Arttalk1984 (talk) 11:54, 5 October 2015 (UTC)Arttalk1984 (talk) 13:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I think that in order to meet the "punchy" guideline for DYK hooks, Arttalk1984, either "museums" or "art galleries", but not both, should be mentioned. The article itself will still mention both. On the one hand "art galleries" might be better since there are galleries in an art museum yet a gallery isn't necessarily in a museum. But on balance I think "museum" better connotes the importance of Mr Shoa's work — plus it's shorter.

The images look great! I'm impressed that you were able to get a photo of Nahem Shoa himself in one of them, too. Your access to him may prove to be important, as I have just discovered that Wikimedia Commons actually requires proof that the artist gave permission for images of their work to be uploaded there. Hopefully that won't be too onerous. I'll let you know details as soon as I know them myself. By the way it's a good thing you kept that photo from 2007, hm? It will go nicely in the article.

I will get started putting the images in the article. Generally speaking images are not placed in the Notes or References section, but in the body of the article, ideally near where what's in the image is mentioned. You'll be able to see how I did it once I have placed them, and we can try different layouts. Don't forget that you can preview changes before saving them; it's especially helpful when adding or moving images, which don't always display how you'd expect from the code. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 14:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again. I would have got into a mess inserting the links to the photos. Ignorance is not bliss. You have been really constructive and helpful. Arttalk1984 (talk) 18:11, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, Arttalk1984, and thank you for your kind comments. I'm glad you're satisfied with the placement of the images in the article. If you're content with the wording, "Did you know... that artist Nahem Shoa increased the number of portraits of Black and mixed-race British people on display in British art museums?", then I will get started on nominating the article for DYK treatment. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 18:58, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, please nominate the article for DYK treatment. Thanks Arttalk1984 (talk) 08:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination has been made, Arttalk1984. You can view the nomination here. The one other time I've nominated an article for DYK, it took about a month from when it was nominated to the nomination being reviewed, revised and accepted, so it will likely take about that long again. Are there any significant dates in November or December that you think would be particularly appropriate for the Nahem Shoa DYK to appear on the front page? Dates can be requested but the maximum delay is six weeks (counting from when it's approved).

Also, do you think you'll begin a new article? Maybe about another British artist? If so I'll be happy to help. But if you're just a really big Nahem Shoa fan that's okay. Incidentally, do you know the correct pronunciation of his name? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 17:50, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Who knows GrammarFascist, I may write another article....with your invaluable help. Nahem is pronounced with a short vowel sound of (a) as in cat. Also Mr Shoa's article may expand in the future.....who knows? Arttalk1984 (talk) 07:59, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia — and I — would welcome your further contributions, Arttalk1984.

So the pronunciation is roughly "Nah-hem Show-ah"? (Though remember that as a North American I don't pronounce the vowel in cat the same way most British speakers do.) Or is Shoa pronounced the same as the word show? Also, is the emphasis "NAH-hem" or "Nah-HEM"? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 12:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC). NAH-hem is correct and surname as Showa. The a again as in cat. Those from the North of England have the flat a vowel sound, but in the South they may say Narhem. Re Mr Shoa's images and consent some are Ok now and some I think are in the process of being sorted. I have been on the talk page of Jcb a Wikimedia editor and asked for help...for what I need to do. Arttalk1984 (talk) 21:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Images for Nahem Shoa article

[broken into separate section] Okay, a friendly and helpful Commons user has provided the following information on what has to be done in order for photos of Mr Shoa's artwork to be allowed at Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia:

The detailed steps are at Commons:OTRS. Essentially, you need to have Nahem Shoa send an e-mail, from an official e-mail address, identifying the photographs uploaded by their filenames and stating that he consents to licensing the depictions of his artworks in the photographs under one of the free licences accepted by the Commons, such as {{cc-zero}}, {{cc-by-4.0}} or {{cc-by-sa-4.0}}. (There is a template for writing such an e-mail on the page linked to above.) This e-mail should be sent personally by the artist, or if that is not possible, forwarded by you or me, to permissions-commonswikimedia.org for verification.

I don't know how much access to Mr Shoa you have; can you ask him to send the required emails? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 18:58, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I think there may be a way of contacting Mr Shoa requesting that he gives consent via his email as you have outlined. Whew. Well we are nearly there. Arttalk1984 (talk) 20:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Through a contact, Mr Shoa has I believe emailed Permissions etc giving his consent for licensing the depictions of his five photographs of his artwork. I trust he did it correctly.Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:24, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

That's great news! I'll see if there's a way we can check whether the emails were received ahead of them being reviewed by the Permissions team at Commons. Thanks for handling this end of things, Arttalk1984. By the way, I am going to put in the DYK nomination if you have no objections to the format of the hook I proposed above. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 11:30, 6 October 2015 (UTC).

The hook you proposed is fine. I hope that Mr Shoa's consent email gets sorted giving permission etc. His images in the Article Nahem Shoa, of some of the many Black people he has painted demonstrates that he has been trying the rectify the lack of Black images in Galleries...what the hook is about?Arttalk1984 (talk) 11:42, 6 October 2015 (UTC).

Below is what is showing on commons.wikimedia on all of Mr Shoa's photographs of his artwork. It is unclear to me whether I as the uploader have to do anything re the files. What do you understand GrammarFascist from the info in the link below?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:OTRS_pending Arttalk1984 (talk) 16:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Don't panic, Arttalk1984. That template showing on the files at Commons just means that the OTRS has been sent in but not yet processed — the backlog for OTRS review is even longer than the AfC review at Wikipedia. Because that template has been placed on the files, they probably will not be deleted before the email(s) Mr Shoa sent can be reviewed; and, if any of them are deleted, the template means it will be easier to recover them if necessary. Sorry that the template placements alarmed you. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 16:43, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay...no panic. Arttalk1984 (talk) 23:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC).

I have since found out that Mr Shoa has received an email re: images and consent and photographer. I believe that he confirmed that I Arttalk1984 took the photos. Arttalk1984 (talk) 08:23, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

I have just read that the file below may be deleted. Can I try and get Mr Shoa to give /email consent to, as he is the artist who created the painting? What else can you or I do? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%27Giant_Head_of_Ben%27_by_Nahem_Shoa_-_photo_by_Yaffa_Phillips.jpg Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:49, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

The file File:'Giant Head of Ben' by Nahem Shoa - photo by Yaffa Phillips.jpg has been marked as having an OTRS pending, Arttalk1984. If Mr Shoa did not yet send in an OTRS for the photo by this other photographer which I found on Flickr, you should ask him to do so ASAP. However, see my comments about photo copyright vs. painting copyright below. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 12:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Below is what I have been able to get hold of RE: Mr Shoa and his images and copyright.

06-10-2015 09:24 - Nahem Shoa schreef:

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [1]

[Nahem Shoa next to his Giant Portrait of Ben, Hartlepool Art Gallery.jpg].

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [2]

[Close up of Giant Head of Desiree.jpg ].

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [3]

[Nahem Shoa's portrait of Desmond Haughton.jpg ].

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [4]

[Facing Yourself Exhbition at Bury Museum 2007.jpg ].

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [5]

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]±

Has he done it all correctly? Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:58, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Arttalk1984. I have no experience in evaluating OTRS submissions, so you should not take anything I say about this as authoritative. Mr Shoa appears to have filled in the basic form appropriately; however, because in these photos there are two copyright holders (him, the artist who created the paintings, and you and the other photographer who took the photos) it may be necessary for him to specify that he created the artwork, not the photos of the artwork. I believe that if such clarification is needed, OTRS evaluators from Wikimedia Commons will email Mr Shoa to request that clarification. But again, my understanding of the OTRS process is limited.

(P.S. I see that your email program uses "schreef"; do you understand Dutch?) —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 12:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

schreef is probably a mistake is the copying and pasting. I have found out that Mr Shoa is being asked for the name a person who took the photographs which is Arttalk1984, me. I will ask Mr Shoa to review the template he filled in. Arttalk1984 (talk) 14:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

Mr Shoa is I believe, asap confirming consent of Yaffa Phillip's jpeg you found on Flikr. Thanks Arttalk1984 (talk) 20:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

I think that permission has now been granted for the Yaffa Phillip's jpeg

Will you have to reinsert it GrammarFascist? Two other images you inserted are accepted now. The three other images I photographed, it seems that I have to fill in a permissions release form? I will do it today. Arttalk1984 (talk) 09:30, 10 October 2015 (UTC).

I have sent the following but received non confirmation from Commons WikiMedia. I think what I did is correct? [Ticket#: 2015100910024321].

Hello, Arttalk1984. Again, I have no experience with evaluating OTRS submissions. The user you contacted at Commons:User talk:Jcb has a message at the top of their talk page saying For any questions about OTRS permissions, please visit the OTRS/Noticeboard, so you should probably ask there about why two images were approved but three require additional information. It's possible some of your emails did not get to the right place. Or the problem might be that your emails claimed you were the "sole owner of the exclusive copyright" of the images when you should have specified that you took the photo but Mr Shoa painted the portraits. Sorry that this process is so confusing, it's frustrating for me too. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 11:47, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

It is frustrating regarding the final 3 images. The sections of artwork have been approved, The Yaffa Phillips photograph has also been approved. Shall I see if I can copy and paste the file in where you had it before, or do you wish to do it?

Whew, now all the images are approved!!!! Now everything is okay. Encountering your generosity in helping has given me hope for humanity. I mean it. Arttalk1984 (talk) 15:27, 11 October 2015 (UTC).

Well, as you know and I have just found out. The image of Nahem Shoa in front of the Giant Head of Ben is about to be deleted. So frustrating. I have asked on the person's Talk page for info and for a solution, so as to avoid deletion.Arttalk1984 (talk) 21:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

The image isn't "about to be deleted" — it's been nominated for deletion, which means that a discussion of whether it should be deleted has been opened. On English Wikipedia deletion discussions typically stay open for at least a week; Commons may use a different period, but I'm sure it will be at least a few days. At the end of the discussion period an administrator will determine what consensus was reached and/or which arguments (for or against) were more convincing. Since it was a mistake for the file to be nominated for deletion, it won't be deleted. We just need to wait for someone with access to the OTRS files to confirm that the file's permissions are in order. Unfortunately there are people who go around Wikipedia and Wikimedia nominating anything for deletion they think they have a chance of getting deleted. This might be a case like that, but it might also just have been an honest mistake on the nominator's part, and we should assume good faith. It's ironic (and frustrating, yes) that the deletion nomination should come right after the copyright status of the images was finally established, but the timing should also work in our favor. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 21:48, 11 October 2015 (UTC).

The nomination for deletion of the image has been removed, as you know. Thanks Arttalk1984 (talk) 15:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Arttalk1984, good news. Now that the OTRS tickets are in place on the pages, there should be no further issues. Thanks for all your work getting the emails OTRS needed taken care of. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 16:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC).

I wonder what will happen RE: DYK? Thanks againArttalk1984 (talk) 17:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Eventually a DYK reviewer will pick the article and review it. Then, if they identify any issues with the nomination, those issues would need to be addressed. Once there are no outstanding issues, the nomination will be promoted to the staging area, and then it will appear on the "front" or Main Page of Wikipedia where it will be seen by many thousands of people. Sometimes the nomination process goes quite swiftly; other times it can take months. It all depends. This is the first DYK nomination I ever contributed to reviewing; it coincidentally just showed up on the Main Page today, after being nominated back in July. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 18:11, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Well done. Whatever happens Re: DYK nomination - Nahem Shoa I have been on a fascinating, frustrating journey of discovery about how Wikipedia. operates. Thanks. Arttalk1984 (talk) 21:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC). Hello GrammarFascist, RE: DYK Nahem Shoa. I have recently read the comments by reviewers/editors and am completely none the wiser what they are talking about. Thanks for nominating the hooks, but maybe they won't pass interesting enough? Thanks. Arttalk1984 (talk) 09:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Howard Sims GA

I'm very pleased to tell you (as the usual bot message hasn't appeared here, for some reason) that the article is now promoted to GA. It was a pleasure to review. Warm congrats. Tim riley talk 15:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

What GA is --Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 04:42, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Good article. Now doesn't your signature look nicer this way? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 05:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Howard Sims

Hello! Your submission of Howard Sims at the Did You Know nominations page 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! Daniel Case (talk) 21:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Funny you should mention this as I'm having this same argudiscussion with someone else at the moment. What we usually like is that if the intro mentions the fact used for the hook, it should be cited there notwithstanding citations elsewhere in the article. Or so I've been told on multiple occasions regarding my own nominations.

The MOS policy section you're thinking of in WP:LEADCITE, which tries to strike a balance, concluding that (with the exception of BLP-triggering content) while citations in intros are not required at the same density level as the body of the article, neither are they otherwise absolutely prohibited.

This, then, guides our reading of DYK Rule 3(b): "Each fact in the hook must be supported in the article by at least one inline citation to a reliable source, appearing no later than the end of the sentence(s) offering that fact. Citations at the end of the paragraph are not sufficient." I interpret that to read that, yes, the first time you give a fact used to support a DYK hook in an article, it must be cited.

Put it another way: another one of our citation rules is that exceptional claims require exceptional proof. While that link leads to a section of the page on fringe theories, I think it has relevance beyond there, and whenever I've written an article that makes some sort of extraordinary claim about the subject in the intro (usually that it is in some way superlative or unique or original), I put the cite in the intro (often because I'm submitting that as a possible DYK hook) as well as the body. To me, a DYK hook fact, no matter how otherwise unexeceptional it is, becomes exceptional in the context of the article because it will be used to entice a reader to look at the article from the Main Page. It will thus be subject to greater scrutiny than it otherwise might be. Therefore, it needs to be cited. Daniel Case (talk) 02:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

This rationale makes perfect sense to me, Daniel Case. I'll go add the citations to Sandman Sims now. (I did want a discussion more than an argu; I mostly just wasn't certain of your meaning, and was less familiar with the DYK standard than the guideline in WP:LEADCITE. The article is undergoing GA review now as well, so I wanted to make sure I wasn't messing up those standards to meet DYK's.) —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 03:04, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

GrammarFascist, another issue has been raised; I hope it wasn't my failure to spot a relevant passage in the article. Please respond at the review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Help Needed

Hi @GrammarFascist: , I have just edited Høybråten, but there are some complictions can you please help ? --Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Aryan hindustan. I have corrected the date formats on Høybråten — for numbers only the allowed format is YYYY-MM-DD, not D-MM-YYYY. Other allowed formats are Month D, YYYY or D Month YYYY (which I prefer). So today can be given as 2015-10-02 or October 2, 2015 or 2 October 2015. Other fornmats throw an error, as you saw.

There is a more serious problem with the Høybråten article, though, which is that Wikipedia (even other language versions) is not a reliable source and should not be cited as a source. There is a template you can put on translated articles, but I will have to look for it tomorrow — it's past my bedtime already.

Most importantly, PLEASE (see how annoying that is?) change your signature so that it is a normal text size; text that large is not allowed in signatures. I would also personally appreciate it if you changed the background color to be less bright, as that #00FFFF cyan is giving me a headache. Thanks and talk to you tomorrow. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 05:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

thanks @GrammarFascist:--Aryan ^from Hindustan (talk) 10:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

sir there is a simmilar problem at " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jail_Yatra_(1947_film) "Aryan ^from Hindustan (talk) 10:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Aryan hindustan. I have corrected the citations at Jail Yatra (1947 film).

• To make doing citations easier, I recommend using the forms you can easily fill in. These are accessed by clicking "Cite" at the far right of the blue bar at the the top of any page's edit window, and then clicking "Templates" at the far left of the second blue bar which will then appear. You can use "Cite web" for most sources, or use "Cite news" for newspapers or "Cite book" for books.
• The "page=" field should not be used for websites; it is only for books and magazines that have numbered pages, and the number to use is the page which relevant content appears on, not the total number of pages in the book or article.
• The warnings in red when there is an error in a citation's format tell you what is wrong. The message "Missing or empty |title=" told you that the "title=" field had not been filled in, but is required — so, the solution was to fill in the title= field. Each of those warnings also has a "(help)" link in it, which will explain more about the problem so you can fix it yourself.

Also, please do not address me as sir (or madam, or any other honorific which indicates a gender). It is not appropriate. You can just call me GrammarFascist, or GF for short if you must. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 18:29, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

ok GFAryan ^from Hindustan (talk) 09:27, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

I was wondering could you have a quick run through Andy C Saxton as I am doing it for a friend and I don't want the page to get deleted. I don't know how to get rid of the england flag and is my template all wrong? i'm trying to learn but im finding it hard!

Thank you again!Majorityverb (talk) 12:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, Majorityverb, helping newer users is one of my favorite things to do on Wikipedia. We all started as newbies.

I removed the flag icon for you (in future all you need do is find {{flagicon|UK}} and delete it). I also changed most instances of "Andy" to "Paxton"; on Wikipedia, after the first mention of their full name, we refer to people by their last names, except with people known overwhelmingly by their first name, like Bjork or Madonna. By the way, is C Mr Paxton's middle name, or should it be C. to indicate that his middle name is longer than a single letter? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 13:20, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Odisha

Hey GrammarFascist! I took at look at the above article because of the Teahouse post about it, but I don't want to touch it while you're involved in a major revision. So I thought I'd just let you know that it appears much of the Economy section is a wholesale copyright violation (see here). I don't know if you're familiar with how to address that and am just dropping this note to tell you this so that you don't waste time on involved edits to that particular section, when it that is likely to be removed or greatly pared back soon. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Ooh, great catch, Fuhghettaboutit, and thanks for letting me know! I will skip the Economy section at least for the time being. Out of curiosity, what made you suspect copyvio, and what tool do you use to check? I use manual Googling when I get a sneaking suspicion, but I know that can't be the most efficient way to go. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 15:43, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

A lot of it is just becoming attuned to various indicia of copying when you do a lot of work in the area. Much of it is really commonsensical—what anyone would think to look for if apprised of the issue and tasked to do so (and has a writer's/reader's fine-tuned ear for language), but are not naturally on alert for if unaware of the problem or have never focused on it. Once you're attuned, start to have a "spidey-sense" for it, you start to see the massiveness of it. It's so much more prevalent than most know. It often goes undiscovered because most people are not attuned. For example, the percentage of new articles that are tagged under CSD G11, that are also unchecked and undiscovered copyvios, is staggering. A lot of it is "flavor", from a gestalt of factors – not easily quantified – but indicia include (and they're just indicia, you can't affirm the consequent):

• Blocks of text – whole paragraphs or series of them – that appear relatively polished (though not necessarily well written), when
• added in one or only a few edits (immediately obvious in a new article; may require investigation in an older one); that
• have a flavor of one writing hand and a consistency and flow leading to a "feel" they they were penned for a different type of work;
• are unwikified and just don't present as normal Wikipedia content that evolved from many hands (sometimes subtle, sometimes patent);
• include the wrong voice you would expect only in some other sort of venue, often seen in misplaced pronouns ("we", "us", "our", etc.); and sometimes easily spotted in things like internal references that obviously could not apply here, e.g. "next page", "our last update..."
• include formatting that presents as pasted whole from somewhere, such as smart quotes, trademark symbols, etc.;
• where such text is out of keeping with other sections of the article (for example, in the Odisha article, we see the prior paragraphs are full of inline citations and this whole section is not [but for a straggler]), and more. See also WP:SPCP.

I do mostly use Google searches and there's a bit of an art to it, though nothing earth shattering. Try to use short but unique segments in quotation marks and if not unique (is likely going to find lots of false-positives) place the topic at issue, say a last name, outside the quotes; avoid including portions that are more likely to be modified slightly, thereby producing a false-negative – like pronouns, last name (which might have been switched from first names); often avoid the beginning of a sentence – take your snippet from the middle of flowing text. A problem in older topic like this one is separating the wheat – original source(s) of copying – from large scale chaff in the form of numerous websites that are copying Wikipedia content (you must click on "repeat the search with the omitted results included" as a baseline since often the source is found there, so your results will be all the more larger). There's various ways: try a book search to see if there's a paper source but if not; exclude Wikipedia from (web) search results; exclude certain phrases that appear and are unlikely to be in the original (-"external links"); recognizing sites immediately that are mirrors and so forth. Some people use Earwig's tool. I've never had much use for it. Oh, and the Wayback Machine is very useful for checking or making sure the apparent source is not a backwards copyvio.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

P.S. I should mention that, in an older article like this one, I find Wikiblame invaluable in targeting when certain text was added.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:07, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for all the tips! I'll try to get a better feel for it — I have found copyvio before, and just rewritten it to no longer be plagiarizing since it wasn't a huge section, but it was like you describe, I got a feeling from the way things were worded that sent me Googling. I suppose spotting likely copyvio is somewhat like spotting grammatical errors, in that you have to already know what you're looking for in order to spot it.

("indicia", "apprised", "gestalt" ...by all means continue to talk erudite to me on my talk page, Fuhghettaboutit. ) —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 22:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Andy C Saxton

Thank you again you really are a great help! What a nice introduction to the wiki community :-) I have found out the C is for 'Charles'. Birth name Andrew Charles Saxton. Also will I be able to upload photos when 5 days have past? I just want 1 photo per wiki page really to show the artist/band.

Thanks again :-) you are awesome! Majorityverb (talk) 17:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome, Majorityverb. Remember not to put his full middle name into the article unless you can find a published source stating it. I have placed the full stop in the article and also in the title (this required doing what we call moving a page, rather than renaming).

I do want to be sure you understand the importance of finding multiple sources from reliable publishers that have treated the subject of the article in depth, for each of the articles you are creating. It would be a shame to put a lot of effort into an article whose subject does not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline.

As for uploading photos, the short answer is that I believe autoconfirmed users can upload, and autoconfirmation requires the account to be 4 days old and to have made at least 10 edits. The more complex answer is that you will need to be sure you have the right to upload specific images to Wikipedia. If you took the photos yourself, then yes, you may. If someone else took them and gave you permission to upload them here, you may not upload them to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. People wanting to donate images to Wikipedia/Wikimedia without uploading their images themselves must email a legal declaration to the Wikimedia Foundation. Copyright is taken very seriously here. All that said, any photos you have taken yourself are welcome, provided they are appropriate for illustrating an encyclopedia article.

Thank you again for your contributions to Wikipedia, and don't hesitate to ask if you have more questions. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 22:57, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:TodayTix has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:TodayTix. Thanks! Worldbruce (talk) 02:53, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cry For Silence (band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slipknot. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lavdrim Muhaxheri has been accepted

Lavdrim Muhaxheri, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Yann (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Yann. I was not the creator of the draft, just the user who addressed issues with it so it could pass AfC review. When I work on drafts that have previously failed AfC review, I either wait for the creator (or other contributor/s) to resubmit them, or resubmit them myself, because I don't meet the requirements to be an AfC reviewer yet and therefore don't feel I should move the drafts to mainspace on my own.

I have copied the above notice to KewinRozz's talk page — they created the original draft, and had submitted it unsuccessfully in the past. If this was incorrect, please let me know. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 17:51, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

removing stub status?

Hi GrammarFascist: I saw that the Zinfandel Advocates and Producers article that we worked on last week has been removed from deletion discussion and is now an accepted article. What I was wondering is if it also should be no longer classified as a stub? In my reading on this, it doesn't appear to have any hard and fast rules on the difference between a stub and an article, although from what I could glean the current ZAP piece seems complete enough to be an article. Will this be some sort of automatic process where some editors routinely peruse the stub listings and change status as necessary or is it something that someone needs to specifically make a point of doing? Thanks again for your help!PH Solution (talk) 17:59, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, PH Solution. I was pleased to see the AfD discussion favored keeping the article as you improved it. There are indeed editors who make it their business to evaluate how articles should be graded according to the guidelines, and update the grade tags on articles accordingly. It could take many months for one of them to come upon the article, though. If you like, I could evaluate the article and mark it as I see fit. Or you could be bold and do it yourself. It's certainly no longer a stub! One more option would be to just keep improving the article until you think it meets the Good article standard, and nominate it. An independent peer review would then determine whether the article merited GA status or not; if not, the reviewer(s) would offer suggestions for specific improvements. It's actually quite a pleasant process, though it can take a while between an article being nominated and being reviewed. Good luck, no matter which option you choose. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 18:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi there (re Lavdrim Muhaxheri)

Hi GrammarFascist, regarding your comments about my article on Lavdrim Muhaxheri, I added it as an open draft prior to submitting it, then other users have been able to edit it. I will check the references and update any missing reference. I'll have this done later this week. Thank you for your input and pardon the missing references. Regards, Kewin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KewinLiam (talk • contribs) 19:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello KewinLiam, I guess this is the account you prefer to use to discuss the article rather than KewinRozz? It's really a team effort now, with a number of contributors, including Werldwayd and several other users who made minor edits like fixing links that needed disambiguation. Arjayay has been doing great work keeping a persistent vand maker of unconstructive contributions to the article at bay. Speaking of which, you might want to be careful to check what edits were made most recently before beginning your own edits — I'm going to have to revert some more unconstructives manually, because your intervening edits mean that I can't just use the "undo" feature. Not a big deal, but something I wanted to be sure you were aware of.

Also, you shouldn't remove sources (like you did with the sources substantiating which countries' media had covered Muhaxheri) unless the sources added by another editor are unreliable sources, or are inappropriate for some other reason. At the very least you should give a reason for deleting a source in the edit summary, on the article talk page, or both.

Anyway, thanks for creating the article and continuing to work on it! To be honest I found the subject unpleasant, but worked on the draft because Muhaxheri seemed like someone there should be a Wikipedia article about. But I'll keep an eye out for as long as the unconstructive IP editor seems determined to make the article worse. And if you want help with anything, do feel free to ask. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 20:33, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi again GrammarFacist, KewinRozz it is. About the references that I removed from the Lavdrim Muhaxheri article, please note that the international media that published the story first, Daily Mail and Independent http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3090886/ISIS-execute-man-BAZOOKA-shocking-new-video.html, Dailymail, BusinessInsiders and so on haven't stated that Lavdrim Muhaxheri appears in the video called Bazooka or RPG video, Independent also explicitly stated that the video is uncensored http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-purportedly-executes-man-with-a-bazooka-in-disturbing-propaganda-video-10267322.html. It's a good thing to point out to other editors since it's often confused by some media outlets but it's not reliable information. Regards Kewin — Preceding unsigned comment added by KewinRozz (talk • contribs) 21:12, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I see your point. Regardless, because other reliable media established that the bazooka/RPG video was believed to depict Muhaxheri, I considered it worthwhile to include coverage of the video even if it didn't mention Muhaxheri by name, just to show that Muhaxheri's video was covered by media in the various countries; it's still him in the video, and apparently him who released the video online. I got confused there; all the sources in the sentence "The vast majority of publications on Muhaxheri come from Kosovo and Serbian media, but his case has also been highlighted by Arab, Australian, German, Greek, Italian, Kurdish, Spanish, Turkish, and UK media." do mention Muhaxheri by name. So I'm not clear on your objection there. If you disagree, perhaps we should take this to the article's talk page and invite other editors into the discussion there.

Regarding the Independent article, I just don't see where you're getting "uncensored" there. I've read the article 5 or 6 times now looking for it, and even used Firefox's find-in-page function, and cannot find any mention of "censored", "uncensored" or any variation. Could you maybe tell me the exact sentence you're looking at?

I just finished making an edit to the article, mostly to revert/correct the IP user's interpolations, but I changed some of your edits too, I think. I didn't see your message above until after I made the edits, or I would have taken that part of my edits to the talk page before making them. Ships passing in the night. Sorry if the timing caused you any distaste. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 21:37, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I have made some other edits to the Lavdrim Muhaxheri article, KewinRozz. Mostly I was fixing citation formatting. Note that the title= field should always be the exact title given in the source (I recommend copy & paste to avoid typos) rather than your personal description of what the source is or says. Also be careful when replacing one source with another that you don't leave behind stray information that isn't correct for the new source, such as publication dates.

Thank you for adding category tags to the page.

I restored the LiveLeak source. I believe it's okay to cite in the context of what it's cited for, even though it's an unreliable source and ought to remain marked as such; it would be good to supplement it with other, reliable sources, but it doesn't need to be replaced. The source you used to replace it (which I have left in the article for now) does not substantiate the claim that the "authenticity of the video has been questioned" in the preceding question, whereas the LiveLeak source does substantiate that.

Actually, the other source you added does not substantiate the claim it follows either. A citation to a reference must verify the statement in the text. To verify the statement "Mike Brown climbed Mt. Everest", you cannot rely on a general reference about Mt. Everest or a reference on Mike Brown. You need to cite a source that directly supports the statement about his achievement. If you have questions about this, feel free to ask me here, or ask the volunteer team at the Teahouse. Thanks, GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 23:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi GrammarFacist, the media refered to initially in "Media coverage of Muhaxheri in 2014 and beyond" is in general about the publication of Lavdrim Muhaxheri.

The Independent and the others who wrote about the RPG video do not mention Lavdrim Muhaxheri. Here's the part about the verification of the RPG video which they state hasn't been independently verified, meaning it's uncensored; "The shocking footage, which has not been independently verified, was reportedly filmed in Syria’s eastern province of Deir Ezzor on Wednesday."http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-purportedly-executes-man-with-a-bazooka-in-disturbing-propaganda-video-10267322.html

Regarding the article about it, article that I changed reference to had a description of the content was an actual article so why not keep it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KewinRozz (talk • contribs) 00:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

---

This conversation has been moved to Talk:Lavdrim Muhaxheri. Please respond there rather than here.

Hi GrammarFacist, first, the Liveleak post that you're referring to is a post that I wrote, (Liam00 is my user account on Liveleak). This is what I wrote "The video doesn't show images of the subjects face after the attack since he's faced down on the ground". I'd recommend a reference to an article that claims editing to say those are more accurate references to the text about parts being cut out. Secondly, I would recommend to email and ask the Independent, they replied to my email about it on the 26th may and this is what they replied about it "as the article states this video and the details contained within it have not been independently verified". Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=820_1432489194#El8dOXaD3buKGO2b.99 — Preceding unsigned comment added by KewinRozz (talk • contribs) 08:17, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

I replied to your comments

Hi! I replied to your comment on Teahouse, please check it. DashaG11 (talk) 09:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

(DashaG11 was referring to this conversation at the Teahouse; I have replied there.) —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 13:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

About scripts and other helpful things

Hello my friend, thought I'd drop by your talk page for a change. :) I was thinking that since you are now out and about editing on many places on our dear WP, you could do with some things that makes editing easier for you. One of those things are something called scripts. I mentioned them earlier to you. A script is a help program you activate by adding one or two lines of text to a special subpage. If you don't like the script, you simply remove the lines again to de-activate it.

I thought I could start with a useful one called Linkclassifier. When you activate it, all the links that are now just blue turn into different colors depending on what kind of links they are. That is how I can so quickly see if something is wrong on a page and what needs fixing. People who like to fix things find this script good to have, editors who just want read the WP find it distracting. Anyway, being the lazybones that I am, I'm copying text here that I wrote some time ago when I helped another editor to start with scripts, I hope you don't mind, as well as adding a link to where I explain how it is activated:

Wikipedia screenshot Barlingbo Church with the script installed

"As for the scripts, they are not as dangerous as they sound. :) At least not the one I was thinking about for you. It is simply a code that is put on a subpage, much like a "sandbox2". Mine are located here User:W.carter/common.js. Two of these codes makes all links shine in different colors depending on what kind of link it is. If you look at the screenshot of Barlingbo Church here, you can see what it looks like with the script installed. All normal links are blue, "Diocese of Visby" is purple since it is a stub and all the green ones are links to redirected pages (they will turn blue if the link is corrected). There are many more colors, you can see them at the end of this page. It works on most web browsers."

And to activate, see: User talk:Yakikaki#Scripts. Try it out if you want to, otherwise I apologize for meddling. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 19:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, W.carter, this looks both useful and simple enough to implement. Thanks for recommending it! What other scripts do you use that you would recommend? How complex for example is Twinkle (which I keep hearing about and IIRC is a script also)? Do you think I should start with just one script, or go ahead and put two or three into my /common.js page at once? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 19:24, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

It takes some time to get used to working with scripts so it is always best to take them one at the time. This is also because some scripts will make new functions pop up on pages and if you install many at once, you will not know which function belongs to which script. But if you try this one and are comfortable with it, I will present the scripts I find useful for you. It may also be good to know that a script can slow down your computer some milliseconds so you don't want a whole bunch of unnecessary ones slowing you down further. Let me know if/when you are ready for the next and we'll take it from there. Oh, and I don't know that much about Twinkle since I don't use it myself, that one is mainly for keeping the order at the WP whereas the ones I use are for writing articles. I suggest you wait a while before you consider that one. w.carter-Talk 19:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your exceptional development as an editor, and the ensuing large amount of good edits, since you became seriously active on this Wikipedia a couple of months ago. I don't think I've ever coached a "newbie" who grasped things so quickly! w.carter-Talk 09:07, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, W.carter. I couldn't've become as helpful an editor as I am without your help. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 12:22, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thanks, for helping me with my first article Joshua Ferdinand. Pippathecat (talk) 08:16, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

All Star Mr & Mrs

Hi GrammarFascist. Thanks for all your help and advice concerning the vandalism on the All Star Mr & Mrs page. I honestly only thought at first I would have only gotten some advice on how to handle it. I was just about to get bak to you as I just noticed the semi block. So, if I decide to register with an account tonight let's say, I wouldn't be able to start editing right away on this page? I would have to wait for a few days. Did you mean on any page or just the semi protected ones?

I also wanted to apologize about how I edited the page on the day of the last episode's airing. It's just the way that I've seen other registered and well revered editors in the realm of the British game or panel show. Source the upcoming episodes and remove the source once the episode has aired. I don't mind leaving the sources there, just as long as there isn't a radical transformation of the page. As for sources, I know that TheRedPenOfDoom mentioned primary sources, but apart from actual Youtube links, the only ones I can think of for shows like that are from the ITV press office which brings out the earliest confirmation on Monday or Tuesday or Tv listings. Otherwise, there might be a list on the bottom from places like IMDB.

I do find editing on Wikipedia a bit of a challenge, especially for me who is starting to lead a busier life. I think every page and editor, particularly, in the British Television section hs their own vision of how to edit. Ever since AldezD and other likeminded editors, did a crackdown on Game show episode listings ( for shows with regular and celebrity episodes), there have been a couple of editors who remain unregistered who try to emulate AldezD, but who seem to not trust any sources such as TvListings that I put on certain pages once that AldezD would accept. It's just a bit of a pain to always get reverted for instances where I have assurance that I'm right, but there is always that one random editor that always likes to create arguments. It's these instances that are turning me off from editing although I do admit editing is a bit addictive especially for certain shows.

OK enough rambling. Have a good weekend.66.130.12.185 (talk) 21:15, 10 October 2015 (UTC)samusek2

Hello, samusek2 (I presume I may refer to you by that string, since you use it after your automatic signatures?) — as I said, there is a way to apply for expedited autoconfirmed status, and I think your edit history would, on balance, count in your favor if you applied. But the worst case scenario is still only a four-day wait.

I haven't looked closely at the edit of yours that TRPoD reverted. I'm not well-versed in the conventions for editing such information about currently-airing TV programs; TRPoD has much more experience as an editor than I do, though it's possible your edit was presumed malicious simply because of the vandalism taking place on the page.

As for reliable secondary sources for the article, do newspapers not publish program listings in the UK, and is there nothing like the US's TV Guide? Either would be a reliable secondary source. Remember that sources cited on Wikipedia do not have to be online, so if there are listings in a print newspaper that don't appear on the paper's website, those can still be cited. You may also find brief blurb articles online mentioning which guest stars will be / were on a particular episode of All Star Mr & Mrs.

If you have a conflict with another editor, you should always try to resolve it through talk page discussion first. There are several options to have uninvolved editors mediate between editors with a dispute, but they all require previous attempts at resolving the conflict on your own. Don't forget to assume good faith (though I know it can be hard when someone annoys you). I wish you a good weekend as well! —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 02:08, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Howard Sims DYK nom

I did see your notes ... just figured that BlueMoonset should be the one to respond since he raised the issue (as it is, I'm fine with your response). Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, Daniel Case, thanks for following up, and thanks again for the review. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 11:50, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

A page you started (Baeomyces rufus) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Baeomyces rufus, GrammarFascist!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I don't know if a separate section for "Research" is needed- research is involved in all aspects of biology. Perhaps calling the section "classification" or "taxonomic history" would be more specific.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Your stamppot image

Hi there GrammarFascist, The image of Boerenkool stamppot that you placed as the main image of article stamppot looks very tasty but that is actually the problem, because it isn't representative at all of Dutch "stamppot boerenkool". A quick image search on Google shows that in Dutch stamppot boerenkool, the curly kale is thoroughly cooked but the veggies in your photo still look fresh and green, even uncooked. Did you make that dish yourself in the Netherlands or elsewhere? - Takeaway (talk) 22:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Takeaway. I learned to make stamppot (including boerenkool stamppot, which is my favorite) when I lived in the Netherlands in the mid-1990s, although I am not Dutch and have not lived there for many years. In my experience different people cook the kale for stamppot for different lengths of time. While in the Netherlands, I encountered thoroughly-cooked-greens stamppot, lightly-cooked-greens stamppot, and stamppots in between, both cooked by friends at home and at restaurants including the university cafeteria.

Certainly when the kale and potatoes are cooked together the kale becomes a duller, yellower green. But the article mentions that the modern method is to cook the leafy greens separately from the potatoes and then mash them together, which is how the pictured stamppot was prepared. (And the article has the second image, the one with rookworst, depicting the traditional one-pot method. I'm not opposed to swapping the placement of the two boerenkool stamppot photos.) You can actually tell that the kale in my photo is not completely uncooked, as kale first gets brighter when cooked, as shown, before becoming dull and yellowish. Raw kale also is not translucent like the kale in the photo.

Does this answer your questions? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 23:05, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

For stamppotten using soft-leaved vegetables, such as andijvie/endive, it is indeed customary nowadays to undercook the vegetables, or even to not cook them at all but to just mix them into the hot mashed potatoes. But as you can see in the images with the link to Google Image Search that I provided above, all of the images of stamppot boerenkool look much mushier than your version and are recognisable as stamppot boerenkool by every Dutch person, which, unfortunately, your version isn't. Seeing that you have lived in the Netherlands, you will know that traditional Dutch dishes aren't really renowned for their subtlety, nor for their tasty presentation. ;-) - Takeaway (talk) 23:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

LOL, I actually quite enjoy a lot of Dutch cuisine, Takeaway... but I can't argue your points.

As for the article, I have adjusted the image so that the kale is not such a bright green. Have a look and see what you think (you may need to Ctrl/Cmd+F5 to force refresh). I also added a nice hutspot photo I found on Commons, so that something other than the boerenkool variety would be represented. I'm still willing to put the rookworst photo as the top image, though I think the order of the two cooking methods should be switched in that case. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 00:25, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

My point was that your version of stamppot boerenkool doesn't look like a normal Dutch stamppot boerenkool. People come to wikipedia to find information of what a dish normally should look like, and not to find what it sometimes can look like. Your version falls in the latter category. The vegetable is cut much more coarse than is usual in the Netherlands, where the standard method is to nearly have it minced, at least for kale, and as I already mentioned before, it just doesn't look anywhere as mushy as is usual in the Netherlands. Changing the colour green a bit still doesn't change the fact that it doesn't look like a normal stamppot boerenkool. As such it shouldn't feature as the main image as it's a highly individual version of this dish. All the stamppot boerenkool images in Google Search more or less look like one another, but they just don't look like what you've made. - Takeaway (talk) 00:52, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, Takeaway, are you saying you just don't think my photo should be the top image, or are you saying you don't think it should be on the article at all? My main reason for replacing the image that was there originally was that the potatoes in it looked gray, which is also not representative of stamppot (at least in my experience). Most of the images that show up in Google searches can't be used on Wikipedia, of course, and my photo seems to be the only one of stamppot on Commons that has potatoes that look more white than gray or yellow. (Double-checking for an alternate image was part of why I wound up adding the hutspot photo.) I also wonder if there are regional differences going on here, as the only time I ever had stamppot with a leafy vegetable I'd describe as minced was in "instant" just-add-hot-water stamppot mix. (That was as good as it sounds.) I lived in Leiden, in Zuid-Holland. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 01:30, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

It's only boerenkool which is sliced very thin, whereas other leaf vegetables that are used in a stamppot, are sliced more coarsely. It's not a regional thing, at least not in my experience (and I have lived in many parts of the Netherlands). I absolutely agree with you that the previous image in the article just looked disgustingly grey, probably due to the camera using the wrong colour temperature by incorrectly adjusting for what it thought was a green hue to become a neutral grey. It is normal that the mashed potatoes in stamppot boerenkool do not stay "potato-coloured" but turn greenish due to the juices coming from the kale.

I suggest to put the image of the stamppot boerenkool with rookworst up as the main image (it's not very sharp but when viewed as a thumbnail it's still ok) or otherwise this image, which I have just a few minutes ago enhanced to look somewhat more appetizing. I'll try to make a new photo of a Dutch stamppot a.s.a.p. though. It's getting cold here in NL so I'm sure I'll be eating some sooner or later.

As for your photo: As I said, and as you can see when you see images of stamppot boerenkool on Google Image Search, it doesn't really look like how a stamppot boerenkool should look like so however appealing-looking it is, it just is not representative of a Dutch stamppot. I view images such as yours (of non-representative versions of traditional foodstuffs) as something that can be interesting for posterity and it will be kept of course on Wikimedia just in case someone will write something about variations on stamppot boerenkool. For files like yours, I've created Category:Dutch food in foreign countries but in addition, it would also be nice to know where it was made. Too often here on wikipedia, I have seen strange and (literally) outlandish versions of food items, that try to pass themselves off as the real thing. See for example File:Panangbeefcurry.jpg, which featured on the Phanaeng article for a very long time until I replaced it with an image of what a phanaeng curry really looks like in Thailand, which is something very different altogether. - Takeaway (talk) 02:39, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, Takeaway. I have made some edits to Stamppot, adding some content and referencing (though much of it is still unreferenced), and also replaced the main image. I think that one is not too bad, though of course a better one would be welcome. (I thought the one you touched up was too blurry, but if you disagree go ahead and make it the main image.) The photo I took is now below the hutspot photo, opposite the section Similar dishes, and its caption reflects that it was not cooked in the traditional manner. If you're not satisfied with that, I propose taking this conversation to the article's talk page and seeking input from other Dutch users of English Wikipedia, so consensus can be developed.

(Your pork phanaeng photo is gorgeous and looks delicious, even to a non-pork-eater. I'm a bit jealous of your travels in Asia. I'm very fond of Thai food (or at least the versions available here in the U.S.) and I would love to someday have Thai food in Thailand.)

Thanks for bringing the issue to my attention and discussing it with me. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 14:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nahem Shoa

Hello! Your submission of Nahem Shoa at the Did You Know nominations page 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! Mhhossein (talk) 02:16, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Dibaeis baeomyces

Hello! Your submission of Dibaeis baeomyces at the Did You Know nominations page 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! Kevmin § 21:11, 12 October 2015 (UTC)