User talk:Jackguitarfan

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jack Pearson (musician) (August 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jack Pearson (musician) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Jack Pearson (Musician), I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

Please do not write or add to an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Your username

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Jack Pearson (Musician)", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because based upon this post at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#page and name declined, it appears that you are not really the musician Jack Pearson. Please understand editing under the name of another specifically identifiable person is not allowed for the reasons given in WP:IMPERSONATE. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing this form, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:00, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Jackguitarfan, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Draft:Jack Pearson (musician) has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 23:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Diannaa, I received your message and I have permission to use everything I wrote or copied as I emailed the artist. The only thing I copied were the lists of songs, engagements, etc - how do I change the formatting on that or add copyright permission that I have so you stop deleting my updates? Yesterday someone took down a bunch of my information that was correct and replaced it with direct paragraphs from the subjects website and I had to try and fix that today. It took a long time to correct. Please help. I did not copy anything from another wiki page other than show where there was a connection - linked. What are you referring to? thank you.musicfan (talk) 00:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC) musicfan (talk) 00:53, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

No. You say that you have permission to use everything. No. Even if the copyright owner has given you permission to use the copyrighted information, that permission, and the copyrighted information, are problematic for several reasons. First, it isn't sufficient for the copyright owner to give permission to use the copyrighted information in Wikipedia. It is necessary for the copyright owner to release the copyright under a CC-BY-SA copyleft for use by anyone. Most copyright owners don't want to do that. Second, even if the use of the copyrighted material is legally allowed by its owner, it may not be satisfactory for use in Wikipedia, because copyrighted material about companies, musicians, et cetera, is usually written non-neutrally and promotionally, and may still have to be edited heavily to make it neutral. Third, if you have been dealing with the artist, you have a conflict of interest. Read the conflict of interest policy. Are you being paid by the artist? If so, even more stringent rules apply; read the paid editing policy. Even if you have what you think is permission, there are still problems. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:52, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Instead of attacking me verbablly NO and NO and accusing me of getting paid for this, why not just help me fix the issue? Your air of superiority and accusations are not professional or helpful @ Robert (and earlier @ Diannaa). I couldn't get paid enough to do what I've done - for the past 3 full days of trying to figure this site out - jeez - and it's still not up. I created a draft - then I went on the community to get help and instead of getting help I woke up this morning to 2 users who went on the "draft" and totally redid it - making it into something far removed from where I started and undoing an entire days worth of work. It's only a draft - please don't overreact and ban me or deny the page. Let's fix it. There are many thousands of fans of this particular artist who search for him on Wiki and other places and couldn't find him here. So can you instead just provide some positive help? I am doing my best as a newbie wiki user. I emailed for permission does not mean he hired me to put this page up. It just means I am trying to be polite and do things correctly. Are you aware you can email anyone on Facebook or through their websites? Again I just say HELP musicfan (talk) 02:21, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Robert I have asked 4 times (2x here and 2x on your page) to have the block lifted from my draft that says I am impersonating the subject- I am not. I have explained exactly how it happened that the user name and the page name was the same (error on my part thinking this was where you got the name of the "page" to be uploaded as it's my first time posting a page on wiki or having an account so when I got the notice from you I realized the error and had the user name changed to jackguitarfan - complying with the rules. Would you please remove that from the page now that I have complied? musicfan (talk) 02:37, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Please unblock me so I may finish what has taken me so long to complete this far. musicfan (talk) 02:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Jackguitarfan, my advice to you is to disclose honestly and completely what your relationship is with Pearson. Transparency is the best disinfectant. Please also be aware that copyright violations will not be tolerated here, and that even if promotional content is released under an acceptable free license, it is not appropriate for Wikipedia since it is not neutral, and does not summarize what independent sources have written about Pearson. This is a neutral encyclopedia and experienced editors will insist on high standards for new articles. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Culen328 I have explained myself and who I am over and over - I made a mistake in creating my user name at the beginning causing Robert McClenon to mark the page as "impersonating" - which I am not. I am a fan of the person. I want to see him have a page on wiki that lists his accomplishments. The Allman Brothers are one of my favorite bands. And you have no need to question me any more from what I have read since I have explained myself so many times in the past few days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith

I remain skeptical that you have no connection to Pearson stronger than being an ordinary fan, but if what you say is true, then edit scrupulously in complete compliance with our policies and guidelines, and all will be well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm curious where to go if I continue to feel harrassed and accused? Are there options? Or does one just start over? cullen328 I am trying my best to be patient and learn the ropes here - are you citing a fact or making a guess about my connection to the subject of this page? Thank you for when you were providing actual help. Meanwhile I will continue to wade through the process of getting a public page up. https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy

You are asking to "unblock me". You have not been blocked. Having a draft declined is not the same as being blocked. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:36, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

I am asking you to remove this: A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove this template message) that you put on the page I am drafting since I explained and complied. Thank you musicfan 03:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers musicfan 03:50, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons uploads

Hi Jackguitarfan. I noticed you uploaded File:Jack Pearson.jpg and File:Jack Pearson playing his Fender Squier.jpg to Wikipedia Commons and claimed there as your "own work" even though the author of each file is listed as "Jack Pearson (Musician)". You should only really do that if you are Jack Pearson himself, which is something you previously said was not the case in this edit. So, I have tagged the files with c:Template:No permission and you should follow the instructions listed at on the templates so that the files are not deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:39, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

it's only because I had changed my user name (it was Jack Pearson (Musician) as I thought that was how you "named" a page to go up - I was simply confused by the directions. It still mine and me and I am not Jack. Please untag it musicfan (talk) 02:24, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying thigs Jackguitarfan. Unfortunately, you cannot freely license images that you did not take yourself or that you do not hold the copyright on. What is needed in such cases is explained in c:COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder. Commons only allows files which are unequivocally in the public domain or freely licensed to be uploaded and anything with questionable licensing is going to be deleted. File:Jack Pearson playing his Fender Squier.jpg shows a copyright mark for someone named Butch Worell, so this person's explicit permission is needed for a free license to stick. The permission needs to be a written (not verbal) declaration of consent and needs to be sent to [email protected] for verification purposes. The same also goes for the other photo. Sorry if this is a bit of a pain, but simply finding an image online and downloading it for "free" does not mean there's been a transfer of copyright for a free license to be allowed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh I did not realize all that about Butch's photo since he said I could use it - Ok I will take that one down and use a public domain one instead - will that work - thank you. musicfan 03:44, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

First, you said you were Pearson and now say you aren't. Then, you represented that you took these photos when you didn't. That looks very bad so I must advise you to be scrupulously truthful going forward. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

I have never said I was Pearson - you are incorrect. What I said for the 6th time is that when I opened my account I thought I was supposed to use the topic of the page as the user name and that is how that page would be named. It was a mistake. As soon as it was pointed out to me I understood and requested a user name change which was approved. Will you finally accept that as the truth (which it is) and leave me alone? Cullen328 musicfan 05:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

@Jackguitarfan: You should be able to upload any image to Commons which is clearly in the public domain or which is clearly under a free license, but it is expected that you properly check the licensing of the image first and make sure it is correct. So, I suggest you ask for assistance at WP:MCQ before uploading anything. The editors who typically work off that page are pretty knowledgeable about this type of thing and they will help you figure it out. Be advised that pretty much anything you find on the Internet is assumed to be copyrighted (even if it does not explicitly say so), unless it clearly says that it is freely licensed or in the public domain.

As for the permission you got from Butch Worell, lots of images are mistakenly uploaded to Commons and Wikipedia based upon similar reasoning. The problem with that, however, is that a verbal OK cannot be verified by Commons OTRS volunteers, it could've been misinterpreted by the uploader, or the copyright holder could later deny ever giving it. That is why an explicit written declaration of consent is needed in Common's chosen format. Uploading an image under a free license to Commons means that the copyright holder agrees to allow anyone anywhere in the world to download and use the image for any purpose (including commercially), and they cannot take this permission away once they give it. That is why most professional photographers are unwilling to freely license their work. They may say or even write down "Sure, you can use it on your webpage." or "Sure, you can use it in your Wikipedia article.", but none of that is good enough for the type of free license that Commons requires.

If you go to a concert and take a picture of a band while they are performing in a public place like an arena, then, assuming there were no other extenuating circumstances, you would hold the copyright on that photo. You could then upload that photo to Commons under a free license of your choosing (but one compatible with Commons licensing requirements) if you like right after you got home from the show. If you took the photo but then posted it online somewhere, you still would hold the copyright on the image (depending upon the licensing agreement of the website where you posted it, but you would probably need send a permissions email to OTRS just for verification purposes because the image can now be found online. Similarly, if you pay/ask someone to take a photo of you for you, then you would need to get their permission to freely license the photo unless part of your agreement with them was that the image's copyright was transferred to you. So, if you can find any images which satisfy all of what I posted above, then you should be able to upload them to Commons. If this any doubt at all about the licensing, then you shouldn't upload it to Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Marchjuly - this is very clear and helpful. I appreciate the time and effort you took to make it clear to me. musicfan 05:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)