Tine Reingaard

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Søren Solkær Starbird.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! SwisterTwister talk 03:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Søren Solkær Starbird.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! TheSpecialUser ^TSU 16:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Søren Solkær Starbird

I have just accepted your draft article. Congratulations and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. :) wctaiwan (talk) 05:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Replied here. wctaiwan (talk) 07:28, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, this is pretty important—did you write the article yourself? Or did you copy material from elsewhere? This page contains an almost identical introduction... Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 13:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh no, I am getting all anxious now: I DID use the text that you refer to, but is that a problem? I'll explain my way of thinking: I think the text is well written, and the content of it is true. Furthermore it is a small world in Copenhagen, so I happen to know the guy who wrote the text. He is not working for Starbird, he just wrote that text because he is a fan, and so am I. I've been following Starbirds career over time. It wasn't hard to find the sources that I didn't already have. And I think he 'deserved' to be on wikipedia. But what can I do now?? Do I have a problem? Will I go to wiki hell? Thanks :-/ Sunshine Warrior 16:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Eh, well, there are some problems, but it's definitely not a "going to wiki hell" matter. The thing is, we're not allowed to use copyrighted content from other places, as that would be plagiarism. If that were the only issue, I'd probably have asked you to ask your friend whether he'd be willing to release what he had written under a free licence, so that Wikipedia can reuse it. However, I've checked the sources you have used, and it doesn't seem like what is written in the article actually matches what is said in them (e.g. the source would mention that he photographed artist X, but the article would say that he photographed X, Y and Z). Under Wikipedia's verifiability policy, it's not enough that you know something to be true--we can only report what reliable sources have said. Under the circumstances, I would suggest that if you have the time / energy, you should rewrite the article from scratch, based entirely on the sources you have found (and any new ones you may want to use).

If you're willing to do that, then you can simply go ahead and start working on it--I would suggest first reducing the article to a single sentence (with a reference) stating the basic facts about Starbird (e.g. "Søren Solkær Starbird is a Danish photographer of musicians."), and then start building from there, first finding a reference for a fact, and then writing about that fact (in your own words), citing the source. If you don't have the time for that or would (understandably) rather not expend the necessary effort, then we'd probably have to reduce the article to a couple of sentences consisting of basic facts, rewritten to make sure that nothing remains of the copied content and that everything is properly referenced.

I'm sorry for not having exercised due diligence as a reviewer to check for copyright issues and sourcing. Please accept my apologies and tell me whether you plan to rewrite the article. Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 12:55, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wctaiwan. Thank you very much for your explanations, your effort over all and your kind way of 'educating' me. I am the one apologizing for doing things incorrectly. I am gaining a lot of respect for Wikipedia.. I'll have to consider what to do now. I have some question that I hope you can help me with, regarding sources on who Starbird has photographed: His books contain hundreds of portraits of all these people. I know that wiki will state that this is not a reliable source, since it comes from himself. But isn't there any chance that his book CLOSER (published by the established publisher Gingko Press and distributed through them to places like MOMA and other metropolitan high end gallery hotspots) could serve as evidence of his portrayals (of artist X, Y, Z etc.)? I am trying to think what a 'real' encyclopedia would contain about Starbird and I do understand that there is a need for 'external' sources when it comes to statements about the reception of him, his style etc. But the actual work is there. It might be an odd comparison, but fx the article on Danish architect Bjarne Ingels http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjarke_Ingels lists the works of Ingels without the use of sources. Which seems fair. So in the same line, I've been wondering why the photography books can't be a reliable source of the actual work. At least it seems counter intuitive to me. I would like to rewrite the article if there really is no way I can go for your first suggestion of asking my friend to release the text under a free license. I'd of course then make sure that to add sufficient reliable sources and if they can't be found, delete parts of the text. But I can understand that this is a no go? I hope it is not too impertinent of me to ask. Thank you. Sunshine Warrior 14:12, 13 October 2012 (UTC) Hi. I excuse my delay in responding. Have been busy. However, I have informed my friend on the issue and am awaiting his response. Hope it will be close to immediate. Thank you so much for trying to understand my way of thinking and acting upon it by asking around etc. Sunshine Warrior 20:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

It's certainly not impertinent to ask. I've thought about it and asked a few people, and I think it'd be fine to use the books as sources showing who Starbird has photographed. However, in most cases, it would probably be better to change the article to fit what the existing sources say.

Given that the sourcing issue can probably be resolved, we can try asking your friend to allow what he has written to be used freely. You'd need to ask your friend whether he is willing to release the content on the Facebook page under a free licence, as detailed at WP:CONSENT. If so, he would need to send an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org as described in the instructions on that page (if not, we'll just have to start over). For [SPECIFY THE WORK HERE], fill in the URL of the Facebook page, and please remind him that he needs to mention that the permission release is for this article on Starbird, otherwise the volunteers who handle the emails wouldn't know what it's for.

I hope the explanation is clear enough. If you or your friend have any questions about the process, please feel free to ask. (And please excuse my rather lengthy response delays...) wctaiwan (talk) 17:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I excuse my delay in responding. Have been busy. However, I have informed my friend on the issue and am awaiting his response. Hope it will be close to immediate. Thank you so much for trying to understand my way of thinking and acting upon it by asking around etc. Sunshine Warrior 20:28, 16 October 2012 (UTC) Hello. My friend is willing to release the content. I've given him instructions and I think it will be done in a few days. He asked whether he should somehow link to this case. I said no, because I guess it is irrelevant for the ones handling the permissions. Please let me know if I am wrong about that. Thank you. Sunshine Warrior 08:50, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure what you mean by "this case"—if you mean the article, a link to it would probably be helpful, just so the volunteers receiving the email know the context for the permission release (though if it wasn't included and they can't figure it out themselves, they'd probably just ask. So no big deal either way); if you mean this page where we're discussing, then you're correct in that it's not necessary. Thanks for the update. wctaiwan (talk) 14:59, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Judging from this, it looks like the volunteers have received your friend's email and verified the permission release. Thanks for sorting that out. :) wctaiwan (talk) 12:14, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Tine Reingaard. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Howicus (talk) 18:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).