NYU-Soc

File permission problem with File:David Garland Professor.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:David Garland Professor.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Michael Hout.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Michael Hout.jpeg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:02, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Michael Hout.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Michael Hout.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:02, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Michael Hout.jpeg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Michael Hout.jpeg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:03, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Michael Hout has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Michael Hout. Thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:27, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michael Hout has been accepted

Michael Hout, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:22, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Patrick Sharkey (professor) has been accepted

Patrick Sharkey (professor), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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!

Sulfurboy (talk) 19:35, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:David W. Garland.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:David W. Garland.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. B (talk) 10:18, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Michael Hout Professor of Sociology.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Michael Hout Professor of Sociology.jpeg, which you've attributed to http://sociology.berkeley.edu/professor-emeritus/michael-hout. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —innotata 20:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ann Morning (September 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 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:Ann Morning 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 get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:30, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello! NYU-Soc, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! Onel5969 TT me 18:30, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

advice

Wikipedia accounts may represent only individuals, not people. Your account presumably represents an academic department, and you must change it or adopt a new one as described in the notice below, such as Joh at NYUSoc or the like.

In addition, you presumably have a WP:Conflict of Interest with this department & its members. Please see our our Terms of Use, particularly with respect to paid contributions without disclosure. If you are writing articles as part of your job, they count as paid contributions and must be so declared.

Gerson and Hout and England are notable; our rule is WP:PROF. Don't say vague things like "tenured professor"--give the rank. In general, most full (but not associate) professors at NYU will be notable, but if any hold a named chair, this should be specified, because that proves them notable beyond question. But the articles you wrote are like press releases, not encycopedia articles. For WP, you need to start off first with a biographical section, giving their birthplace and a date, schools and dates from high school on, positions and dates, all in chronological order, not inverse chronological order. This has to be in the text, not just the infobox. Then a section describing their research, linking --as you did very properly-- not just to their own work but to articles about their work from other people as well.

Then a section on major awards, by which we mean national-level awards, and elected Fellowships of national associations, presidencies of national organizations, and editor-in-chief positions for journals. In-college awards should not be included , nor student awards. The awards have to be given in the article--you cannot refer elsewhere to a list. They go in the text, only the one or two most important go in the infobox as well. The refs have to be given according to WP:REFBEGIN.

Then, if their notability depends mainly on published books, list every such book, linking to their description in WorldCat, not the publisher or Amazon. Include links to reviews--published reviews in reliable sources (I usually try to give every such review I can find in an academic journal of major reliable publication like the NYT.) If notability depends on articles, still give whatever books there are, and give the 4 or 5 most heavily cited peer-reviewed articles along with the citation count, taking the data preferable from Web of Science, or if necessary google Scholar. We normally do not include articles if there are also numerous books, unless there is one or two of special importance. We never include book chapters, lectures, speeches , posters, or the like. Major book and article awards should of course be referred to, as you did.

As matters of style: We link to all institution and society names and places the first time they appear--we link to all major concept names also--one time only. We do not link to dates. We link to the names of other people if they have a WP article. References need to show in standard bibliographic format the full references, both to print and online versions if both exist. If there is an open access version, it should be indicated as well. An external link is necessary to the person's official web site at the university. Make absolutely certain that nothing at all is copied from there or any other previous publication or web site. (It is possible to give permission if you own the copyright, but the way it's written is usually so s unsuitable that it isn't worth the trouble)

Ann Morning may or may not be notable: She is still only an associate professor. (and this should have been said--don't try to hide it by omission) She has only one book. She has no major awards. The draft needs some considerable adjustments: Of the awards, only the 2009 one should be included. The chapters section should be removed. "Selected articles" should be trimmed. Whether the citation counts are sufficient for notability in her field will need to be decided. --Let me know when ready, from your new account.

It is only fair for me to alert you that writing articles for all the professors in a department tends to produce a feeling of skepticism in WPedians that the purpose of the writing is promotion of your faculty, not providing encyclopedic information to readers of an encycopedia. The best way to avoid it is to start with the very most notable--the holders of named chairs, and to go very slowly. Even so, expect questions. If your writing is honest writing appropriate for an encycopedia , I'm experienced in these matters and will help you answer them. DGG ( talk ) 05:58, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose.

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice. Thank you. DGG ( talk ) 05:58, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

NYU-Soc (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Requested username:

Sally-Soc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

I am an administrator for NYU, the edits I make come from the first hand sources. They submit their materials to me and I create their Professor profiles via Wikipedia. I do not understand how my username is invalid. I will follow your guidelines once I have been unblocked.

Decline reason:

Having looked at your contribution history, and read your unblock request (in which you refer to using Wikipedia to create what you call "profiles") I have reached the conclusion that the purpose of this account is to use Wikipedia for the purpose of publicising the careers of people at your university, acting on their behalf. That is not what Wikipedia is for, as explained to you above. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:36, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

The username is unacceptable because it implies that the account's shared by a department of NYU. Also note that Wikipedia is not a profile site; it is a crowd-sourced encyclopædia. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 21:39, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Ann Morning concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Ann Morning, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ann Morning has been accepted

Ann Morning, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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!

SwisterTwister talk 03:58, 28 August 2016 (UTC)