User talk:Nlopi761

December 2017

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Caron Butler, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:45, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Kathryn Tappen. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 22:09, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hi and thanks for your message on my talk page. Wikipedia articles to be written in language that is neutral and not promotional or resume-like. One example of promotional language in the edits you made is the sentence "With eight years of experience at the NHL Network and NESN, Tappen brings her in-depth hockey knowledge and award-winning reporting skills to NBC Sports Group’s NHL and football coverage" as well as additional words in the lead section like "a regularly scheduled on-air presence" and "the most-watched program" etc. These are the kinds of things that would be written about her in a bio on a website promoting her or her work, or in a resume. Wikipedia is instead an encyclopedia, so content should be written completely neutrally as it is currently (e.g. "won" an award rather than "was honored" with it). Please also note that if you have an external relationship with Tappen, you may have a conflict of interest and so should read the relevant guidelines and make sure to comply with them. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 22:22, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Kathryn Tappen headshot.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Kathryn Tappen headshot.jpeg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 21:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:Kathryn Tappen headshot.pdf

Thanks for uploading File:Kathryn Tappen headshot.pdf. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 21:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:Kathryn Tappen interview Rams.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Kathryn Tappen interview Rams.jpeg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:01, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Kathryn Tappen headshot.jpeg

A tag has been placed on File:Kathryn Tappen headshot.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:50, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photos you find on Twitter, Facebook, etc. are not automatically in the public domain and are considered to be protected by copyright unless clearly indicated otherwise. Moreover, the copyright of photo is generally considered to be held by the photographer who takes the photo, not the subject of the photo. So, even though Tappen herself is using this as her Twitter photo, she is not automatically the copyright holder of it, umless she clearly can show she took the photo herself or she owns the rights to it per some sort of copyright transfer agreement. Media personalities such as Tappen often have photos taken professionally for PR use, etc. and the copyrights of such photos tend to be held by the persons/agencies who take them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:54, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Kathryn Tappen interview Rams.jpeg

A tag has been placed on File:Kathryn Tappen interview Rams.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:19, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Kathryn Tappen headshot.pdf

A tag has been placed on File:Kathryn Tappen headshot.pdf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:20, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest editing

Hello, Nlopi761. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Kathryn Tappen, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. Editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion is not permitted. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:21, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nlopi761. If by chance you have any external connection either directly to Tappen herself or indirectly to her via your employeer or somebody connected to her, you are likely to be considered to have a conflict-of-interest (COI) with respect to anything written about her on Wikipedia. Although COI editing is not something expressly prohibited by Wikipedia, it is something which is highly discouraged because it can quickly lead to other more serious problems. Moreover, if you are being paid or compensated for your editing in anyway (perhaps even as a intern working for someone/something connected to Tappen), then you really need to pay close attention to Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Editors being "paid" for their contributions are required to disclose such things per the Wikimedia Foundation"s terms of use, and those who do not run the risk of having their accounts blocked. COI/Paid editing needs to be done very carefully and adhere to certain guidelines, so I suggest you also read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. If you have any questions about this, please feel free to ask them here or at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:30, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image uploads

Hi again Nlopi761. Pretty much every photo or other image you find online should be assumed to be protected by copyright, unless it clearly states otherwise. Just because you can view an image for free and even download it for free that does not mean it is free from copyright protection. Moreover, the person taking the photo of creating the image is typically considered to be the copyright holder and not the person depicted in the photo or posting the image on their website. In order for something such as this to be uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, the explicit consent of the original copyright holder is needed. If you as the uploader are not the original copyright holder, then the original copyright holder needs to email Wikimedia OTRS stating that they agree to release the photo/image under a free license acceptec by Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. You can find out more about this is c:Commons:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder. Image copyright can be tricky and it's easy to make mistakes, so it might be a good idea for you to ask for assistance at either Wikipedia:Media copyright questions or c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright before uploading anymore. It's OK to make a mistake once and maybe even twice, but repeatedly uploading images files under inappropriate licensing may eventually lead to an administrator stepping in and taking action. Even unintentional copyright violations are still copyright violations, so such things should be avoided whenever possible. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:47, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, Nlopi761 and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears you are participating in a class project. If you haven't done so already, we encourage you to go through our training for students. Go through our online training for students

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Please also read this helpful advice for students.

Before you create an article, make sure you understand what kind of articles are accepted here. Remember: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and while many topics are encyclopedic, some things are not.

Your instructor or professor may wish to set up a course page, and if your class doesn't already have one please tell your instructor about that. It is highly recommended that you place this text: {{Educational assignment}} on the talk page of any articles you are working on as part of your Wikipedia-related course assignment. This will let other editors know this article is a subject of an educational assignment and aid your communication with them.

We hope you like it here and encourage you to stay even after your assignment is finished! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:40, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! It doesn't look like you're editing as part of a Wiki Education assignment, so I wanted to reach out to you about this so you can give some information to your professor about the Wiki Education program. It's a good way to do assignments on Wikipedia because we provide you with trainings and other content that can make it easier to learn the ins and outs of Wikipedia, making for a smoother editing and educational experience. If you could, can you ask them to contact my co-worker Samantha at samanthawikiedu.org? Also, I wanted to give you a link to our training modules - they give a good outline of what you need to know as far as editing goes. I especially want to point you towards the module on uploading uploading images and other media. As others have said, you cannot upload media taken from other sources unless you own the copyright to the material (ie, you took the photograph) or unless the copyright owner has issued a ticket to WP:OTRS giving Wikipedia permission to use the material. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:52, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I also wanted to caution you about editing Tappen's article via my main account as opposed to my work account, Shalor (Wiki Ed). That page has a history of sockpuppetry, which is essentially people creating new accounts in order to avoid detection, get around a block, or give off the impression that there are more people arguing for a specific viewpoint than there actually are. It's not uncommon for people to use sockpuppetry to try to promote a person on Wikipedia. As a new user coming into the page you came under suspicion because this has been happening on the page and because your edits had issues with copyright and tone. When editing articles you need to be extremely careful to make sure that the content does not run afoul of copyright issues and is neutral in tone. I don't mean for any of this to scare you, I just wanted to give you a bit of explanation about why it's so important to make sure that your edits are neutral, are not WP:COPYVIO, and follow the other editing guidelines about style and tone. It may be a good idea to spread your editing around a little and find an additional topic to edit instead of focusing specifically on Teppen, given the circumstances. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]