User talk:Davidjosephanselmo

Welcome!

Hello, Davidjosephanselmo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Esc (film), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 05:45, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Esc (film)

The article Esc (film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per WP:NFF

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 05:45, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

B. P. Paquette

added a link pointing to Darwin

Jason Ross Jallet

added a link pointing to Darwin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Darwin (2015 film)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Darwin (2015 film), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Darwin film 2015. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:39, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Darwin film 2015

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Darwin film 2015. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Darwin (2015 film). Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Darwin (2015 film) – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. BOVINEBOY2008 22:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:Jack Richards poster.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Jack Richards poster.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:The woman of ahhs canvas.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:The woman of ahhs canvas.jpeg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:06, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Your Name Here.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Your Name Here.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Perspective still.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Perspective still.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Perspective font test export still 2.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Perspective font test export still 2.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Your Name Here - film - 2015 - Official Poster.JPEG

Thanks for uploading File:Your Name Here - film - 2015 - Official Poster.JPEG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:05, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Your Name Here.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Your Name Here.jpg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 02:40, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mel Hoppenheim School of Cinema, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gary Burns. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jason Ross Jallet, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Musical and Gemini. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Your Name Here (2015 film) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Your Name Here (2015 film), 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) 01:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Your Name Here (2015 film)

Hello, Davidjosephanselmo. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Your Name Here".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:33, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mathieu Séguin

The article Mathieu Séguin has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no reliable references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. reddogsix (talk) 02:15, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mathieu seguin

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Mathieu seguin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:01, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ivan Gekoff

added links pointing to Bulgarian and Violet

Andrew David

added a link pointing to Music score

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 18 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of films shot over three or more years page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Davidjosephanselmo. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Mathieu Séguin

Hello, Davidjosephanselmo,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Mathieu Séguin should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mathieu Séguin .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, scope_creep (talk) 23:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ernest Riffe

Hello, Davidjosephanselmo. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Ernest Riffe, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Ernest Riffe to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, Robvanvee 08:43, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Zahra Golafshani for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zahra Golafshani is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zahra Golafshani until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Ernest Riffe for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ernest Riffe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ernest Riffe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 16:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Grim Trigger for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grim Trigger is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grim Trigger until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 16:57, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Your username

Please also familiarize yourself with our Wikipedia:Username policy. If you're actually telling the truth that you're not personally David Joseph Anselmo and using his name is just an "inside joke", then you're in violation of our rule against usernames that impersonate other people.

Conversely, if you're lying in the deletion discussions and actually are David Joseph Anselmo, then be aware that while we don't have a rule forbidding people from editing under their real names, we do strongly discourage it for privacy and personal safety reasons — people can be and have been harassed in the real world if they posted information here that enabled other editors to track them down in real life, so we strongly encourage editors to protect themselves from that risk by not posting personally identifying details, like real names or contact information, on here.

But if you are telling the truth about not being DJA, then you can and will actually be blocked from editing Wikipedia for falsely using his name. Bearcat (talk) 17:45, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Wow, you can really contort facts Bearcat. My wiki username is "Davidjosephanselmo," which is not my actual name. I had no idea when I selected this Wiki username a half decade ago that it was also the name of the CEO of a film studio in the city that Grim Trigger would eventually be produced in A HALF DECADE LATER. Difficult to argue that I am "impersonating" someone I don't know and who is not a celebrity or in any significant way "known." This person, I note, has no Wiki page. Once again, this CEO, to whom I have no relation, ALSO has NO relation with the film Grim Trigger. There is no connection between me, Grim Trigger and film studio CEO David Josepn Anselmo. There is no THERE, there, so please move on. Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 18:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Every article you've ever created has been about a person who works in Sudbury's film industry or a film made by Sudbury's film industry, and you expect me to believe that you had no idea that somebody named David Joseph Anselmo is the kingpin of Sudbury's film industry and your username is therefore a random coincidence? There's this thing called Occam's razor — look it up. Bearcat (talk) 18:21, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

As a point of fact, (talk), you are incorrect. Not every article that I have contributed has been about a person who works in Sudbury's film industry or a film made by Sudbury's film industry.

The individual who is the CEO of this film studio in Sudbury is listed on IMDB as "David Anselmo," and he is hardly the "kingpin" of Sudbury's film industry. Do I know of him? Yes. Know him? No. Regardless, I did not know of him, nor do I think he was a presence in Sudbury's film industry a half decade ago when I selected my Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo." Despite the similarities in my Wiki username and the name of this CEO, he has nothing to do with Grim Trigger. You are the one who is attempting to make a connection where none exists. Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 18:41, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Firstly, I didn't say every article you've ever edited had a direct Sudbury connection — but every article you've created most certainly does.

Secondly, your account was registered in 2013, at which time DJA was already the CEO of Northern Ontario Film Studios — there's Sudbury Star coverage of him in that role dating back to 2012. He's not some guy who came along years after you were already using this username — he was already CEO of Sudbury's main film studio before you registered this username and started creating articles about Sudbury's film industry.

Thirdly, while the IMDb profile is under the name "David Anselmo", his profile on NOFS/Hideaway's website is under the name "David Joseph Anselmo", and most of the media coverage about him that does exist covers him as "David Joseph Anselmo". So no, the name on the IMDb profile does not constitute evidence in and of itself that this is all just a random coincidence. Bearcat (talk) 19:01, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

First: Again, you are incorrect that every article that I've created has a direct Sudbury connection. Most, but not all. Second: Even if there is news of him and his "studio" dating to 2012, his "studio" had not yet served as such and he had not produced anything. I just checked his IMDB page and he has no credits as producer until 2013, and these are as "co-producer" or "executive producer," which is very different from "producer". Regardless, my Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo" is not related to this CEO, named "David Anselmo." I have never posted anything on Wiki, or anywhere else, about this person, and/or his film & TV projects, most especially not Grim Trigger. Again, you are the one who keeps attempting to make a connection where none exists. Third: My Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo" and this CEO, listed as "David Anselmo" on IMDB, is a coincidence, and I have never attempted to impersonate him. You are the one who is claiming that I am impersonating him and who thinks that Grim Trigger is somehow related to him. For the umpteenth time, I am NOT this CEO and he has absolutely NOTHING to do with Grim Trigger. You are the ONLY person attempting to make this connection. Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 19:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are attempting to argue at this point Bearcat. You claimed that there was a conflict of interest between my posting about the feature film Grim Trigger because you thought that I was Sudbury film studio CEO "David Anselmo" who you assumed was producing and/or was in some way related to Grim Trigger. I keep repeating that I am not this CEO and that this CEO has absolutely nothing to do with Grim Trigger. When you can find a link between CEO David Anselmo and Grim Trigger, then you'd be correct about a COI. Please send a link(s) when you uncover a link between this CEO and Grim Trigger. Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 19:23, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Firstly, I've reviewed your edit history, complete with the "only show edits which are page creations" filter. Every single page that you've created, without exception, had a direct Sudbury connection — the only person in the entire batch who doesn't live in Sudbury contains the statement that he's a frequent collaborator of someone who does live in Sudbury. So no, I'm not wrong about that.

Secondly, NOFS was incorporated in 2012, per "North's film industry needs workers", Sudbury Star, September 20, 2012, and Hideaway's website states that it was launched in 2011. Films take time to make, so the fact that DJA doesn't have IMDb credits until 2013 does not mean that he wasn't already active prior to that.

Thirdly, conflict of interest does not only apply to writing about oneself or one's own work — if there's any form of professional or personal relationship whatsoever between the creator of the article and its topic, then there's still a conflict of interest. DJA, or somebody who appears rightly or wrongly to be DJA, is not just precluded from starting or editing articles about DJA, NOFS or Hideaway — he's precluded from starting or editing articles about anybody he has worked with at NOFS or Hideaway, anybody he merely knows in his personal life because they work in Sudbury, any film project associated with Sudbury, and on and so forth — so yes, Grim Trigger most certainly is still a COI for him, because even if he's not personally involved in the production he does personally know and has worked with many of the people who are involved.

And finally, it's still simply not credible that your edit history pertains so strongly to Sudbury's local film industry, and yet your username matching the CEO of NOFS/Hideaway is just a random coincidence. Bearcat (talk) 19:49, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

First: Again, incorrect about my edit history. Second: Regardless of anything about CEO "David Anselmo," you've not provided any link whatsoever that he has ANYTHING to do with Grim Trigger. Third: What can I say, Bearcat? I'm simply not this CEO and this CEO has nothing to do with Grim Trigger, and, again, you have not provided any link indicating any connection between them. As far as I know, no one in a position of authority regarding this feature is related to this CEO. The sole connection is that this CEO operates his business in the same city in which Grim Trigger is being produced. Otherwise, NO connection whatsoever. Furthermore, none of my Wiki posts have had any relation to this CEO. Kinda odd that most of all of my posts are about Sudbury's film industry, and yet I've never written about this CEO whom you claim is not only me, but is the "alpha dog" of Sudbury's film & TV industry. Apparently, these facts don't add up to anything for you, who seems to be Trump-like living in his own well-sealed bubble. Since this is so, you'll have no option but to go ahead and believe your alternative facts. Sad. Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 20:24, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

First: again, not incorrect about your edit history. I've reviewed your edit history, and have the ability to isolate pages you created from pages you merely edited, so I've seen the complete list of pages you created. The onus is on you to show the proof that you have created other pages not connected to Sudbury's film industry — because if you have, they sure aren't showing up in your edit history. Unless you've created pages under other usernames in the past, until I know what those other usernames are I can only evaluate what you've done under this username.

Second, yet again, it is irrelevant whether DJA has any personal involvement in the production of Grim Trigger. He has worked directly with Jason Ross Jallet in the past, for just one example — which means that regardless of his involvement or lack thereof in this film, he still has a direct conflict of interest, because he has a direct professional relationship with people who are involved in the film. I reiterate what I said earlier — COI does not only mean DJA can't write an article about himself or his own company, but colleagues and friends are fair game. Anything with any form of direct connection to DJA — people he has directly worked with at any point in his career, people he hasn't worked with but knows in his personal life, those other people's companies, any film project that any of those other people undertake whether with DJA or not, etc. — is still a conflict of interest.

So I'm sorry, but I'm not the one making up "alternative facts" here. Bearcat (talk) 21:55, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

First: Before continuing with this matter, we are losing sight of the point. Why would it matter if I only posted on Wiki on matter's related to Sudbury's film industry? What is immoral, illegal, or otherwise incorrect about this? Must Wiki contributors contribute only to a variety of subjects? Second: How is there a conflict of interest about my posting about Grim Trigger, which involves Jason Ross Jallet but not CEO "David Anselmo"? Because Jason Ross Jallet and CEO "David Anselmo" are credited as having worked on a film that is NOT Grim Trigger, you believe there is a conflict of interest if I post about Grim Trigger? Where, and with whom, exactly, is this conflict of interest? As I've repeated, my Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo" is a pseudonym, and I am not CEO "David Anselmo." There is absolutely nothing in my Wiki history that suggests that I am this person and I have never written anything about him, his frequent collaborators and/or his film &TV projects. NOTHING. Aside from my Wiki nom de plume "Davidjosephanselmo" being similar to film studio CEO "David Anselmo," you have utterly failed to make a connection between myself and this person. All you have is a name, and how many Wiki contributors use their actual names as their usernames? Furthermore, if I was CEO "David Anselmo," why wouldn't I even attempt to create a Wiki page of my own? Or for any of my frequent collaborators? Or any of my films and/or TV projects? Why would I EXCLUDE myself, my frequent collaborators and my own films & TV productions from Wiki? In short, why do you have no satisfactory answers to any of these questions? I almost feel like revealing my actual identity just to reveal how ignorant you really are. I cannot help but think that you see yourself as some kind of Wiki dictator. Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 22:53, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to use a hypothetical example here to answer your questions: imagine that I and my best friend are both entrepreneurs who are launching new smartphone apps. We already know that Wikipedia forbids starting the articles about our own companies, so we trade off so that I'm starting an article about his company and he's starting an article about mine. We each stay away from directly editing our own articles in the hope of avoiding detection, but fundamentally all we're really doing is swapping jobs so that he's writing the article I want and I'm writing the article he wants. That's still a conflict of interest, because our intent is still to use Wikipedia as an advertising platform to publicize our apps — the fact that we're not officially employed by each other's companies does not absolve us of COI, because we still have a personal relationship with each other and are still trying to help each other get free publicity. Which is why DJA, or a person who appears to be DJA, does not have to be personally involved in the production of Grim Trigger to still have a conflict of interest about it — because he has a personal relationship with the person who is producing that film, it's still a conflict of interest because he has a vested interest in helping his friend publicize the project.

And that's also exactly why not having written an article about David Joseph Anselmo does not prove, in and of itself, that you're not connected to him — people avoiding articles about themselves because they already know that Wikipedia prohibits that, while using their accounts to do a solid for all their friends and colleagues instead because they don't know that Wikipedia prohibits that too and/or knew that but hoped they wouldn't actually get caught, is actually an extremely common trick on here that a lot of people have tried over the years. I'm not making shit up to be difficult — this is really a thing people really do, and it really is still against our rules.

So, the bottom line remains: if you're lying to us and really are David Joseph Anselmo the film producer, then you have a conflict of interest with regards to Sudbury film industry topics, because they're people you know and have worked with personally, and thus have a vested interest in helping to publicize. And if you're telling the truth and really are genuinely unconnected to him, then you simply can't edit Wikipedia under his name at all — not to mention still having an apparent conflict of interest anyway, because your concentration on Sudbury film industry topics still implies some kind of direct personal connection to Sudbury's film industry. As awesome as it is that Sudbury's film industry is growing, it's still not nearly large enough that most people working in it are known in any significant way outside of Sudbury yet — and as great as it would be if that were to happen, Wikipedia is not the place to make it happen.

We're not a LinkedIn clone where every person who exists is entitled to have an article just because they exist — we have notability and sourcing standards that have to be followed, and those standards do not include films that are only just entering production this week, short film directors who have won local awards in the cities where they work and are sourceable only to that city's own local media, or people who are sourceable only to IMDb. A film gets a Wikipedia article when it's released and starts garnering critical reviews in real media, not the moment principal photography starts. A film director gets an article when he or she achieves something of national or international significance — getting a film into TIFF or Sundance or Cannes or Berlin, winning or being nominated for a Canadian Screen Award or a BAFTA or an Oscar, etc. — and not just for winning an award from Cinefest's local program for Northern Ontario filmmakers. A person does not get a Wikipedia article just for being programming director or founder of an organization that doesn't have its own article about the organization, such as MFM or NOMPCIDC. And on and so forth — a person working in the film industry gets a Wikipedia article when you can source them to a broad range of media coverage, not limited to the local media in the city where they work, that verifies a credible claim of notability which passes WP:CREATIVE. When a Sudbury-based filmmaker or a Sudbury-produced film starts getting coverage in the Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail, The New York Times, Variety, The Hollywood Reporter or other publications of that ilk, that is when an article will become justified — but they do not qualify for an article yet if their coverage is limited solely to the Sudbury Star and Northern Life.

I am not, and don't see myself as, a "dictator". But Wikipedia is a place that has rules that have to be followed, and as a site administrator it's part of my job to assist in enforcing them when they're being violated. And you'll note, for example, that I'm (a) not the person who formally reported you to UFAA, and (b) not the person who blocked you. So you don't even get to make any of this about me just because I'm discussing the issues with you — I'm not the person who imposed any of the sanctions. All I've done is try to politely explain why all of this is against our rules. Bearcat (talk) 18:00, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

FACT: I am a third party unrelated to said Jason Ross Jallet, said CEO "David Anselmo", and said film Grim Trigger. And the fact that you cannot prove a connection not only annoys you, but also allows you to reveal your true fascistic colors. As you know, this is not a discussion. It is a monologue given by you. You made up your mind before anyone could say anything. And by your own determination, much like your President's nutty executive orders, you've silenced your opposition. In addition, I'm guessing you feel rather stupid for assuming that my Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo" was actually said CEO "David Anselmo." And your theories are about as credible as those espoused by mein herr Trump & company.

FYI, just to reveal how full of shit you really are about your own "standards": there were 3 features at Cannes last year. Two were produced in Northern Ontario, and one, Two Lovers and a Bear, had Jallet as a producer. This film also played TIFF and is also currently up for a handful of Canadian Screen Awards. Another feature on which Jallet was a producer, Jean of the Joneses, premiered at SXSW, screened at TIFF and is also nominated for Canadian Screen Awards. AND YET YOU STILL NOMINATED TO DELETE HIS WIKI PROFILE! The fact that he, and other profiles of other prominent Northern Ontarians are being torn down by your executive orders because you have deemed them to be insignificant and not newsworthy, especially in a region as large as Northern Ontario with a population of 3/4 of a million people, is, in a word, stunning. I will see if I can interest our local insignificant media to look into your exact comments to see if there is a story to be had about about this. Stay classy, Bearcat and other like-minded Trumpians at Wiki.

Again, given that your primary interest in Wikipedia has been creating articles about Sudbury-based filmmakers and Sudbury-based film projects, it is simply not credible that your username matching the real name of the CEO of Sudbury's main film studio facility is just a random coincidence. Either you are him, or you're somebody using his name for some other purpose. I've been contributing to Wikipedia for over a decade, and have seen users pull every stunt on here you could possibly imagine, and some you couldn't. And I'd be remiss if I didn't point out, further, that you just referred to the Sudbury Star as our local media after spending almost 24 hours insisting that you had no personal connection to Sudbury or its film industry at all. So which is it?

And secondly, you're misrepresenting what I said about Cannes or the Canadian Screen Awards. Notability on Wikipedia is not inherited, so the fact that Two Lovers and a Bear screened at Cannes does not hand every individual person who happened to work on it an automatic inclusion freebie — Jallet did not personally garner media coverage for his work on the film, so he does not get an automatic notability pass just because his name is in its credits. And the film may be up for CSAs, but Jallet is not the nominee in any CSA category, so he does not get an automatic notability pass just because his name is in its credits. For an award win or nomination to count toward notability, it has to be to him personally — a film's production manager does not get an automatic notability freebie just because the film's editor and make-up artist got CSA nominations; he gets over our notability rules when he gets a CSA nomination. And the same goes for Jean of the Joneses as well: if he is not personally the nominee in any CSA category, then the film garnering CSA nominations does not confer notability on him in and of itself.

And for the record, not only am I not a Trump fan, I'm not even an American. I'm Canadian, and I'm originally from Northern Ontario to boot. I pay considerable attention to the Northern Ontario film industry, and frequently start the articles when notability can be demonstrated properly and reliably sourced — just go ahead and check out who started our articles on the Sudbury-based television projects Météo+, Les Bleus de Ramville, Hard Rock Medical, St. Nickel, Cardinal, Letterkenny and What Would Sal Do?, if you think I've got some kind of bias against Sudbury's film and television industry. The difference is that I understand what constitutes enough notability and enough reliable sourcing to actually satisfy Wikipedia's rules — but I actually do more than almost anybody else here to try to get Sudbury's film and television industry into Wikipedia, if and when the notability and sourceability can be demonstrated properly.

And as for Sudbury's "insignificant" media, I frequently use both the Sudbury Star and Northern Life for citations — when those citations are supporting a valid claim of notability. The issue is not that they're fundamentally invalid publications — it's that the context in which the coverage is being given does not demonstrate more than local notability. Even The New York Times or the Toronto Star could not get a person into Wikipedia by themselves if they're covering him in a purely local context for something that doesn't constitute a claim of nationalized or internationalized notability — the Sudbury Star doesn't count for less because Sudbury inherently counts for less; it counts for less because it's local coverage of somebody acting in a local context and thus doesn't demonstrate that they have wider notability beyond the purely local. The Sudbury Star does not assist notability if you're going for "local person notable because local media coverage exists", or "Val Caron teen wins Confederation High School poetry contest" or "local filmmaker wins short film award at Cinefest" — but it can assist notability if it supports "local writer is nominated for Giller Prize", or "local filmmaker wins Academy Award" or "local filmmaker wins short film award at TIFF". The issue is not that the Sudbury Star or Northern Life are "insignificant" — but the context of what they're covering someone for still has to pass one of our notability criteria.

All of that said, if you use the "Trump clone" line of attack again I'm going to revise your editblock so that you can't edit this talk page either anymore, because you're posting uncivil personal attacks. Bearcat (talk) 20:11, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

"Either you are him, or you're somebody using his name for some other purpose." Sheer genius on your part, especially the "some other purpose" bit, which, as I first explained to you, was an inside joke. And , again, not between myself and said CEO "David Anselmo" -- who, for the umpteenth time, I am not related to in any way. Which, again, brings us back to you lacking any connection regarding a conflict of interest. Still waiting for that bit of "proof" that doesn't exist.

In the film & TV industry, those in the opening credits -- especially the producers -- are the most significant. The fact that you are comparing a production manager -- who does not appear in any opening credits -- with a producer reveals your ignorance of the subject that you are attempting to edit, if not censor.

So let me get this straight: you are allowed to claim to be from Northern Ontario and start many Northern Ontario related articles on Wiki, but if I do the same then I am barred? Why am I not shocked by this coming from you?

So, essentially, you're saying that media coverage in the Sudbury Star and Northern Life is significant ONLY when it is also appears in Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail, The New York Times, Variety, The Hollywood Reporter or other publications of that ilk, correct? How, then, does this not make media in Sudbury Star and Northern Life insignificant? Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 20:37, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I've been watching this conversation, and I wonder what the heck "inside joke" refers to. Your username is davidjosephanselmo, and the director, (who you keep forgetting has a middle name), is David Joseph Anselmo. That is way to big of a coincidence to be swept off as whatever you meant by "an inside joke." Even if you are not Anselmo, your Username was possibly in some way inspired by him. To continue, I'm a New Yorker, right? Let's say that I'm an indie filmmaker in the area who has won many local awards. I'm only famous in the NYC metro, and only the indie scene, but I'm notable enough to get interviewed by the NYT. Am I notable enough for a wiki article? Not really, the NYT and the Sudbury Star are both covering local events in this case, so none are above the other, prestige doesn't trump the fact that that I (or he) has any notability outside his area. And no, people found in the opening credits don't inherit notability. A producer isn't a creator. The admin does "claim" to be from Northern Ontario, and the thing about the articles he made and some of yours is that they have notability in media, Like this one, covered throughout Canada. The fact that you are insinuating that the admins are dictatorial and are "like minded Trumpians" is uncivil. You're painting the picture of someone out to get you when that's not he case. JerrySa1 (talk) 21:09, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Yet again, it does not matter whether you are personally David Joseph Anselmo, or just somebody else using his name. If you have any form of relationship whatsoever to Sudbury's film industry, then you still have a conflict of interest with regards to those topics. Professional connections, personal connections, it does not matter — COI applies to any form of personal relationship between an editor and the topics they're editing about.

Secondly, film producers still do not get an automatic inclusion freebie on Wikipedia just for being producers. They get Wikipedia articles when they're the subject of reliable source coverage which verifies passage of a specific notability criterion, namely WP:CREATIVE — they do not get an automatic notability pass just because they exist. Even in Hollywood, we don't have an article about every film producer who exists at all — we have articles about the film producers who can be reliably sourced as accomplishing something that satisfies a specific Wikipedia notability criterion, and not about the many more who can't. Even film directors aren't guaranteed Wikipedia articles just because they and their films exist, either. To use the example of Jean of the Joneses, the film had an article seven full months before Stella Meghie had one, and she didn't qualify for an automatic inclusion freebie just for the fact of being a film director — someone tried that and it got deleted. Rather, she finally cleared the bar just a couple of weeks ago, because she got a CSA nomination for Best Screenplay.

Thirdly, you're still misrepresenting what I said about media. Local coverage in Sudbury's local media is not inherently invalid in all cases — it's perfectly acceptable if it supports a valid notability claim, and not acceptable if it doesn't. Federal Members of Parliament are required to have Wikipedia articles, for example, so Paul Lefebvre and Marc Serré do not have to be sourced beyond Sudbury's local media — but conversely, being a city councillor or a school board trustee is not a notability claim that gets a person into Wikipedia in and of itself, so Sudbury's local media are not enough sourcing to get Joscelyne Landry-Altmann or Michael Bellmore into Wikipedia just because "media coverage exists". If a Sudbury-based writer wins or gets nominated for the Giller Prize, then the Sudbury Star or Northern Life are enough sourcing to get her into Wikipedia, because the award is a notable one — but if a Sudbury-based writer wins a local high school poetry contest in Sudbury, then the same papers aren't enough sourcing to get her into Wikipedia, because that award is not a notable one. The Toronto Star works the same way: it's enough sourcing to get Nathaniel Erskine-Smith and Marco Mendicino into Wikipedia because they're federal MPs, but it is not enough sourcing to get a school board trustee such as Chris Moise into Wikipedia just because "media coverage of him exists". And even The New York Times works the same way: it's enough sourcing for Nydia Velázquez, because she's a federal congresswoman, but is not enough sourcing to support the owner of a gourmet chip stand in Williamsburg just because the NYT's food critic reviewed it.

If the basic claim of notability is a valid one that passes WP:NPOL or WP:CREATIVE, then the sourcing does not need to go further than the Sudbury Star or Northern Life — but if the basic claim of notability isn't one that would pass a notability criterion, and instead you're going for "notable because media coverage of them exists", then the sourcing does have to go further than the Sudbury Star or Northern Life. Again, that's not just because the Sudbury Star and Northern Life are based in Sudbury, because the same restriction applies to the Toronto Star and The New York Times too — it's because the context of what the Sudbury Star or Northern Life are covering the person for is not an encyclopedic notability claim.

And again, that's the difference between the articles about Northern Ontario that I created and the ones you created: I created articles when a specific notability criterion could be reliably sourced as having been passed; you created articles which presumed that "because he/she exists" was enough. And just a final reminder as well: you did not get blocked for creating articles; you got blocked for using an identifiable, potentially notable other person's real name as your "inside joke" username, which you're not allowed to do. Bearcat (talk) 21:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

THREE UNFOUNDED CLAIMS by Bearcat: 1. The two reasons that you cited to delete my articles and/or the articles that I've significantly contributed towards, are that the subjects lack notability and; 2. The Wiki contributor -- me -- has a COI because if my Wiki username is "Davidjosephanselmo" then I must be Northern Ontario based producer "David Anselmo"; 3. Furthermore, if I'm not said Anselmo, then I'm impersonating him, whom Wiki claims is "a well-known, living person" so therefore my Wiki account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia.

THREE FACTS 1. Regarding the first claim and, for example, the subject Jason Ross Jallet, you -- all of a sudden -- claim this prominent Northern Ontario based producer, who has produced acclaimed features that have screened at Cannes, TIFF, and SXSW, and that have been nominated for Canadian Screen Awards, lacks notability yet he's had his own Wiki page since 2011 (please note: not created by me) that has undergone various additions and verifications by Wiki contributors/administrators. Odd, no?

2. I claim that my Wiki username is a pseudonym and that I am not said Anselmo. Furthermore, there is absolutely nothing in my Wiki writing history that connects me to said Anselmo other than I write about the film & TV industry in Northern Ontario. Please note that said Anselmo has no Wiki page of his own. (Has one been attempted? I have no idea, but I've never attempted one). In addition, on those films that he is associated with that have Wiki pages, I have never contributed anything as a Wiki contributor. In order to fabricate a connection, however, Bearcat proposes that there is a nefarious arrangement between said Anselmo and once notable Northern Ontario based producer Jason Ross Jallet wherein they secretly swap Wiki contributions to avoid detection by wily Wiki contributors like Bearcat. This wild concoction is based on the fact that said Anselmo and Jallet share credits on a single project, The People Garden (according to IMDB). In short, this wild claim would not make me said Anselmo, but actually once notable Northern Ontario based producer Jason Ross Jallet! If so, then said Anselmo is not getting his fair share of Wiki coverage as "Davidjosephanselmo" has never contributed to anything he's ever done. Regardless, I am neither acquainted with said Anselmo nor with once notable Northern Ontario based producer Jason Ross Jallet, and no valid connection -- direct or circumstantial -- has been established between myself and either of these two individuals other than I contribute to Wiki articles that involve the film & TV industry in Sudbury -- a particular circumstance that I ironically share with Bearcat, yet I am punished for this and Bearcat is not. Odd, no?

3. With my Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo," how am I impersonating "a well-known, living person" -- a person of notability -- when this person, said Anselmo, has neither a Wiki page, nor merits one according to the standards cited by Bearcat? Odd, no?

At the end of the day, these three claims by Bearcat remain unfounded while, by executive orders, my Wiki account has been blocked indefinitely, and articles that I've worked on are destroyed or are nominated for destruction. Under these peculiar circumstances, please excuse my disgust with Bearcat and other like-minded Wiki contributors/administrators.

Firstly, I'll remind you that I said DJA was potentially notable, not that he already had a Wikipedia article. Although film producers are not automatically guaranteed Wikipedia articles just because they exist, he can and will get an article if and when he can be properly demonstrated to pass our inclusion criteria for film producers. He doesn't have an article right now, and nobody said that he did — but he is a person who may qualify for one eventually, and so you can't use his name if you're not him. It does not matter what you claim your intentions were, or who your "inside joke" was or was not with. You are using the real name of an identifiable real person, who has a direct professional connection with the people you're writing articles about, as your username. You're simply not allowed to do that, period, regardless of your reasons or your motives. And that rule doesn't only apply to "famous" people either, so quibbling over whether DJA is famous or not is a moot point: I'm a nobody, but I could still get you editblocked if you were editing articles using my real name.

Secondly, I'll remind you again that notability is not inherited. A person does not get a guaranteed Wikipedia inclusion freebie just for working on films that got CSA nominations — CSA nominations only constitute notability for the nominees, and do not turn into an automatic inclusion freebie for everybody else who worked on the same film. Sherri Shepherd and Stella Meghie are the only two people who get to claim notability because of the fact that Jean of the Joneses got CSA nominations, because they are the two people who got the nominations — the film's award nominations do not turn into automatic inclusion rights for the producers, the executive producers, the associate producers, the production managers, the editor, the cinematographer, the costume designer, the make-up artist, the sound editors or the location managers. Jallet was not personally the nominee in any CSA category, so the fact that he happened to work on a film for which other people got CSA nominations, but he didn't, is not a valid notability claim in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 19:57, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

In my humble opinion, Bearcat, your answers to my questions are incredible weak, and the following facts remain: - No connection -- aside from my Wiki username -- has been proven between myself and said "David Anselmo." For all we know, you, Bearcat, may have ulterior motives for deleting my articles and blocking me from contributing to Wiki; - I note how you completely disregard the fact that once notable Northern Ontario producer Jason Ross Jallet was notable enough for other Wiki contributors/editors/administrators from 2011 to 2017, but not enough for Bearcat; - I repeat: the irony that I am blocked for my Wiki username sharing the name of someone Bearcat claims is notable but not notable enough for his own Wiki page.

Hopefully someone else at Wiki can intervene in this dictation since a discussion would be appreciated.

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because the username, Davidjosephanselmo, matches the name of a well-known, living person.

If you are the person represented by this username, please note that the practice of blocking such usernames is to protect you from being impersonated, not to discourage you from editing Wikipedia. You may choose to edit under a new username (see information below), but keep in mind that you are welcome to continue to edit under this username. If you choose to do so, we ask the following:

1. Please be willing and able to prove your identity to Wikipedia.
2. Please send an e-mail to info-enwikimedia.org. Be aware that the volunteer response team that handles e-mail is indeed operated entirely by volunteers, and the reply may not be immediate.

If you are not the person represented by this username, you are welcome to choose a new username (see below).

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

1. Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
2. At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
3. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you think that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Orange Mike | Talk 19:29, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Perspective font test export still 2.jpg

The file File:Perspective font test export still 2.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused. Superseded by File:Perspective still.jpg

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)