SPS888

September 2023

Hello, I'm ARandomName123. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to LaDoris Cordell seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi ARandomName123. I am Judge Cordell's web designer. All of the information I've published is accurate, so I do not understand your concern. Can you be more specific? In particular, the photo representing Judge Cordell is not neutral, it is plain awful. SPS888 (talk) 20:18, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Further, and as an example, per the wikipedia guidelines, her education should be "last-attended higher education institution," which is, in fact, Stanford Law School, not Antioch College. SPS888 (talk) 20:20, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

The problem is the tone you used. A neutral point of view is one of the most important aspects of Wikipedia (WP:5P), and your edit wasn't exactly neutral. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

There also doesn't seem to be any indication of the license of the photo. To be included, photos should be licensed under Commons:Copyright tags. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Feel free to readd the changes to the infobox; those edits are fine. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, I will take at your guidelines. Regarding the photo: There are many dignified photos available of the retired judge. Until I research the issue with the photo I have uploaded, and have permission to use, may I have your permission to simply remove the demeaning photo of Judge Cordell? SPS888 (talk) 21:02, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

That should be fine. You can also ask the judge to license that photo, and only that photo under a correct license so that it can be used. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 21:07, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, just wanted to let you know that I've removed the book from her infobox, since it's not really notable. The rest of the edit is fine as is. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 21:23, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Very good. I'm sorry, I'm not clear what you mean, "ask the judge to license that photo?" Please note, I felt lost looking through the many options for copywrite, that's why I didn't click anything. Can't I just include a link to it on her website. SPS888 (talk) 21:25, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

A photo included in Wikipedia has to be offered under the Creative Commons public license, meaning it could be used by others, even for commercial purposes. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for more information. ... discospinster _talk 21:37, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

It's a bit complicated for the image on her website. You would have to confirm who owns the copyright to the photo, the photographer (which is usually the case) or the judge. Once you have confirmed who owns the copyright, and that they are willing to donate it to Wikipedia, have the copyright holder follow the instructions at WP:DONATEIMAGE. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 21:40, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Of course, there's a much simpler solution. I'm not sure how close your job is to the judge, but, if possible, you could just take a new photo and upload it to Commons. If you plan to go this route, please take a look at the first section of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 22:02, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. The error message says I have a week to sort it out. This seems to indicate I could reference her website. "If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it)." I'll give it a shot. That said, I could ask the judge to have the photographer upload it? I don't want to be a burden, though, and would very much like to resolve it on my own. For what it's worth - she hates the photo Wikipedia is using to represent her, and I concur. SPS888 (talk) 22:21, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Asking the judge to have the photographer to follow the steps at this link would probably be the easier way forward. Make sure the photographer understands what uploading their work to Commons means. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 22:27, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok, and I appreciate your taking the time to help me. I just need to say how disappointed I am that the degrading photo she dislikes so very much was returned to the page - without an honest explanation. SPS888 (talk) 22:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Further regarding the unflattering photo: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, see this page..." We have no idea who put that horrible represenation of the judge there; it's shameful, and she deserves better. SPS888 (talk) 22:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

That guideline pertains to the text of the article. Per WP:NOTCENSORED: "being objectionable" is generally not sufficient grounds for the removal of content. I probably should have mentioned this in my earlier reply, so I apologize for not doing so. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 23:01, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries, rules are rules. SPS888 (talk) 23:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Quick question, are you being paid for your edits? If so, please add Template:Paid to your user page. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 21:39, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I am not. I am on retainer for Judge Cordell's website, though? SPS888 (talk) 18:15, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

In that case, please add Template:UserboxCOI to your userpage. If you're not sure how to, I'll be able to do so for you.

Your current edits seem fine and similar edits in the future are also fine, but any significant changes to the article (ex. your first edit to the article) should be requested through the Edit Request Wizard/COI. Thanks for cooperating. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:05, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please add it for me! And sorry for not following the rules, I'm learning as I go. Thank you again for your generous help. SPS888 (talk) 19:14, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Done. If you link the image you would like deleted, I should also be able to deal with that. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:24, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure where that landing page is, but here's the link from the revision history. Note: I noticed someone had already cropped it, for use, but there was a disclaimer it would be deleted, too. https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=LaDoris_Cordell&oldid=1173494526#/media/File:LaDoris_Hazzard_Cordell,_Photo_Credit_Laurie_Naiman.png SPS888 (talk) 19:32, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Don't think any action is needed. Should be deleted in less than 30 days. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I would imagine 'conflict of interest' is pretty common on here; I'm glad it's disclosed! SPS888 (talk) 19:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Heh yea, it's pretty common. Thanks for actually disclosing your COI, COI editors don't often do that, leading to lots of work for us editors. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Is this instruction current? "If images are for use in infoboxes only, and are being used under fair use rules, they should not be any larger than the size displayed, e.g. 220–300 pixels wide." If the intent is to let others use this file, perhaps for print, isn't it ideal to upload a larger file? Perhaps upload two versions, one full size, and one sized for the infoBOX? Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload SPS888 (talk) 20:11, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

As the photographer will release their new photo under CC-BY-SA, I presume, this does not apply. Fair use is limited to images that are currently under copyright, ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:13, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm glad I asked. I'll upload one file, and we'll see how it goes. It's confusing because optimizing images has changed over the years. Bandwidth required uploading "display" size images, but now we have multiple device sizes so larger is ideal... come to think of it, we used to slice up photos so they would load quicker. SPS888 (talk) 21:15, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

We can always crop/resize it post-upload, if needed. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 21:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

What to do when there are multiple articles to the same story, do we attempt to cite them all? Likewise, some of the referenced articles require a subscription. Is it better to find an alternative, or perhaps feature one that is accessible, followed by the one that is not, e.g., the New York Times. SPS888 (talk) 22:29, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by same story. Is the URL or the text the same?

Subscription required articles are fine. If you wanted, you could mark them with a subscription label, as I have done here. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 22:34, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt reply! Same 'topic' (not story), but different URL, e.g., CNN vs. The Root. Each emphasizes different things. And I see, there's a little red lock on there now... very good solution. SPS888 (talk) 22:46, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

In that case, as long as one source covers the entire statement, using only one is fine. Of course, there is a preference for more reliable sources. I'm not familiar enough with The Root to determine its reliability, but CNN is reliable per WP:RSP. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 22:55, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I understand. The Root is from a Black perspective. I guess if it is a racially charged issue, perhaps a straight take on the issue, and one from the affected community to be thorough. As for the Turner rape case, I'll try to find an article that doesn't require a subscription, in addition to keeping the NYT subscription. SPS888 (talk) 23:02, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

She is also a very good friend of over 20-years. Let me know what box to check (the instructions/rules here are a bit daunting for me). BTW: that photo I uploaded, I have no clue how to delete it. The photographer is deceased, so I'm not clear how to get a copyright... anyway, I'm preparing one of the Judge in her judicial robes, and the photographer will upload it, so that issue has been resolved. SPS888 (talk) 18:26, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

If you can link the unused photo here, I'll see what I can do. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:07, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

There's no reason to remove the photo, it is perfectly fine and does not cast her in a degrading light. ... discospinster _talk 21:35, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Well now, I'm not clear how this works: I removed the unflatering photo, why is it back? Did you decide, discospinster? SPS888 (talk) 22:09, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Please see WP:OWN which explains that the subject of an article (or their representatives) do not have any special rights to dictate what is in the article. It's a perfectly normal photo. ... discospinster _talk 01:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

That is your purely opinion that it is “normal,” is it not? And I’m not asking for special rights; it clearly does not represent someone of her stature. I’ll bet I won’t find another judge’s photo that dishonors them on this entire platform. SPS888 (talk) 02:24, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)