User talk:Chriscs26

Your submission at AfC Ian Scott (artist) was accepted

Ian Scott (artist), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as B-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!

TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 07:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

The list of works in public collections is one of the vital means of proving Scott's notability. They should be included in the main body of the article, not tacked on as an afterthought. Embedded urls should not generally be used in the body of an article - see Wikipedia:MOS#External links. The verification should be in the form of inline citations.

I accept your point about the list of external links, but it seems they are also further reading (not used in the article?). Sionk (talk) 20:42, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree the list of public collections is important and should stay there. But don't you think it would be cleaner to have the links to the museum collections as external links at the bottom? I just don't really think they're 'citations' and it works per the rules "Articles can include an external links section at the end, pointing to further information outside Wikipedia as distinct from citing sources"? Chriscs26 (talk) 20:55, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Not as a general rule. Scott is no Jackson Pollock, Pablo Picasso or Paul Cezanne. It is beneficial, even vital, to have convincing evidence his work is important enough to be held in a number of important public collections. It puts his notability beyond any doubt. Sionk (talk) 21:07, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Jeff Wall, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 10:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

This is your final warning to not re-add files that where removed for violating WP:NFCC. If you continue to do so you will be blocked. Werieth (talk) 11:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

In defense of Chriscs, they also added a critique of the paintings whose images were added back. It was not simply reverting to be bloody minded. Giving an immediate final warning is an extremely harsh over-reaction, in my view, especially as they appear to be a 'newbie' with a genuine desire to contribute useful content to Wikipedia. Sionk (talk) 21:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Sionk are you refering to the Jeff Wall page or Ian Scott (artist)? I used the Jeff Wall page as an example of using 4 copyright visual artworks exactly as I was on the Ian Scott (artist) page, whereupon Werieth promptly removed the images from the Jeff Wall page (seemingly to prove a point to me), after which I reverted his removal as I thought he was being pig-headed & destructive. He then removed them again and warned me, since which time they have been returned again by someone else. Certainly the his harshness and seeming spite put me off contributing to wikipedia. Chriscs26 (talk) 21:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I have zero spite, your actions taken with a very little understanding of policy WP:NFCC, was inappropriate. Given multiple reverts across multiple articles, a uw-nonfee was issued, after continued reverts which violated policy I did give you a final warning as an attempt to get you to stop violating policy. Werieth (talk) 21:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 03:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

		The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path
		New here, and you're already building things like Ian Scott (artist) from scratch? That's an excellent piece of work, thanks. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:45, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

.