User talk:January/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 → Archive 8

User:Homebodies

Hi there January, thank you for editing my post.

I am user:Homebodies.

I just learned from Wiki mail that my username is illegal because it represents a group.

I am wondering, is my posting, which you kindly edited, also illegal?

I created it without using the 4 tildes, for one thing--my bad. I am not used to Wikipedia style yet.

But what about the content for the page I created? Is that legal content, or does it not meet the requirement of being significant.

Also, was my attribution legal?

Homebodies (talk) 19:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Upload of non-free files

I don't know, or think, that I have. As I said to the original reporter of this, I had some trouble with my scanner and I may have done accidentally, in which case please delete them. But in no way do I want to invoke WP:COPYVIO and that was not my attempt to do so, I just kinda got it wrong in attempting to upload them, since I have been cleaning out the house and moving the printer/scanner and so forth.

So please do delete them if you find them. I couldn't put them on Commons, because of the licence restrictions there, so uploaded them to EN:WP, but if I am in the wrong I should be very glad of your help to make sure I am not in COPYVIO.

My sincere best wishes Si Trew (talk) 22:07, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

January, please, delete it, let it go. I could argue the case but if there is any doubt, best to let it go, if I have a better idea some other time I can always add it back. Please let me assure you of my good faith, but it was a struggle to upload it in the first place, and perhaps I should have thought better than trying. Delete it, please. Si Trew (talk) 22:10, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Done. If you change your mind and think you are able to make a valid fair use claim for it, let me know and I'll restore it. January (talk) 22:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to thank you for your recent very-speedy deletion of my no-longer-needed user-space pages. Since I read AN/I and some of the other admin noticeboards and I don't recognize your name, I can only assume that you are one of those admins who actually does the work rather than getting involved in drama or wikipolitics. For that, I thank you as well.  :) Neutron (talk) 21:05, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm not really a noticeboard regular, although I only got the mop quite recently which is why you might not have seen me around much. January (talk) 18:45, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Have a cookie

SwisterTwister has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.


To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

I hope you enjoy this cookie as a friendly greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 19:26, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! January (talk) 21:42, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and because some issues were found, it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MAMEhub. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! mabdul 18:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I just put a missing AFC tag on it, you may like to inform User:Zambr123 who created it. January (talk) 19:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Mmmh, okay. To many editors edited the page. I will inform him. thanks. Please keep in mind: you placed the wromg code on it (should have been substituted like the template said.) mabdul 19:31, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Vincent Versace

I was just about to tag this page for speedy deletion as the whole content was copied and pasted but there was a claim on the talk page that the creator of the article owns the copyright of the work and therefore, he grants permission for us to use his work onto Wikipedia (Although he hasn't specified a licence), and for that case, I reverted my edit. Is it safe to remove the copyright tag on this occasion, or was I correct about tagging this page for speedy deletion? Minima© (talk) 20:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I've responded to the creator at the talk page. The copyvio tag should remain until permission is confirmed through OTRS or on the source website, but I would recommend not tagging it for deletion yet as permission looks likely to come. After the initial 7 days is up I would suggest relisting it for one more week. January (talk) 21:41, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Graham Berrisford

Dear January,

Following the example of an associate of mine, I thought it a good idea to insert a one paragraph biography of myself into Wikipedia, not least because it is considered a more reliable source than some others.

If I understand the process correctly, you have deprecated my entry on the grounds that the statement declaring me to the managing director of my own company (Avancier Limited) is not verified at the reference given, to my own web site (Avancier.co.uk). Yet my web site does show me to be occupy this role. So please can you explain this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.81.190 (talk) 19:15, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I can't see the name on the page linked in the article. Is it on a different subpage?
The intention of the proposed deletion is not to deprecate the article, it is a request to provide sources in line with WP's requirements that all biographies of living persons should have sources. However please be aware that the creating or editing an article on oneself is discouraged (see WP:Autobiography), and the article will ultimately require secondary sources in order to provide evidence of meeting Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion. January (talk) 19:33, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

selfref

You said that selfref was a "valid hatnote" but I respectfully disagree. I list it at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 August 13. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.70.187 (talk) 15:57, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Unflattering but true

I put in an addition that was unflattering but true. I noted the article from CityPages. Could you tell me why it was deleted? How would I provide a "verifable source"

Kmulv (talk) 23:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)KM

Your edit was a copyright violation, but the source clearly states that prosecutors dropped the case against him because "DNA specimens taken from the woman didn't match". This is not relevant to the article if the subject was not convicted, or even tried. January (talk) 23:31, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Unflattering but true

Thank you. I understand

Kmulv (talk) 23:52, 15 August 2011 (UTC)km

Jack Hoban

You deleted the page for Jack Hoban. Can you please reactive it? Thank you.Mtpublicaffairs (talk) 16:04, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm afraid not. It was deleted because it was a recreation of the article already deleted recently per WP:Articles for deletion/Jack Hoban. I see you have already discussed this with the closing administrator, you can still challenge the outcome at WP:Deletion review if you wish. January (talk) 17:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Crubeen

thank you for your contribution to the Crubeen page, but unfortunately by you moving page Crubeen to Crubeen_(band) this has orphaned all the images and pictures. and after 7 days they get deleted.

Can you please fix this ? and restore the images and pictures. perhaps when moving the page, you should have moved the images and pictures as well.

John6547 (talk) 12:10, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

The orphaned images weren't caused by the page being moved, they were removed here by another user a few days before the page move because they were not considered to meet non-free content criteria. The only image in the article at the time I moved it was File:Crubeen part.jpg, a Commons file which has since been deleted there because there was no evidence of permission [1]. January (talk) 12:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Subtle vandalism work

I'm sure you'll read my comment at WP:ANI... and I'll try, if I can find the time, to get deeper into all that you discovered, but I just wanted to reiterate how important I think the work you did in tracking down the basis of that post is... the subtle vandalism stuff is really the most pernicious threat to the encyclopedia going forward, and I think making people aware of that stuff is critical. Your work is exactly what we need more of, so I wanted to thank you. I didn't recognize your name, but that said I've been rather inactive lately so that may be expected. In any case, it's great work. Shadowjams (talk) 09:01, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. That IP's been popping up on my watchlist a bit lately and I was getting increasingly suspicious. I just wanted to make sure it wasn't my imagination! January (talk) 16:55, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For this great find, ANI is such a soap opera, good to see it being put to good use once in a while... Cerejota (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! January (talk) 16:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry

If you believe the section I put in the Mike Pence article doesn't deserve to be there then I will leave it out. Sorry about my tirade at the other user on the talkpage. I tend to let my temper get the best of me when I get accusations thrown at me.

All the best,

--Andy0093 (talk) 20:21, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

A second opinion

Could you have a look at these contributions for me. Just would like a different set of eyes.RafikiSykes (talk) 22:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ParkinsonsUK

I've left them a note about the COI and username (using the organisation's name as a username is not permitted per WP:ORGNAME). The main problem with the edits looks to be over-reliance on their own website as a source. It did need expanding from the stub version before they started which gave undue weight to the boycott campaign, but having about 80% of the article based on their website is too much. WP:COIN may be a good venue to get wider input. January (talk) 09:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Cool thank you. I had no objection to balancing out the perspectives in the article but I had thought too much was from their own website. Will have a look at COINRafikiSykes (talk) 14:10, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Soham murders

Thank you for [2]. Sorry if including the name was inappropriate; I hadn't come across the policy that you refer to. In fact the person in question has gone public to the extent of writing a book on the subject (see ISBN 1844546217), but I'm happy to err on the side of caution nonetheless. Scil100 (talk) 17:45, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Rosemary West's children names

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_West I noticed your removal of a name in the soham case and wondered if similar could be done here? Given the hatred shown towards the woman I wonder if removing the names and birthdates of her children entirely would be better for their safety. RafikiSykes (talk) 18:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. The argument for removing their names must be at least as strong as for removing the name which I added to the Soham case (which to be honest I'm somewhat ambivalent about in view of her book; see above). Quite aside from the safety issues -- which, sadly, I think you may be right about -- it seems to me on a reading of WP:BLPNAME that this is just the sort of general privacy issue that the policy seems to be aimed at. However, I'll leave it to January or another similarly experienced editor to actually make the edit, just in case. Scil100 (talk) 18:26, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
I trimmed it to remove the names, they had no citation which was reason enough by itself for removal. If another editor reinstates it with a source we can discuss further (I notice someone else had already suggested removal on the talk page). January (talk) 21:31, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I guess you could reply on the talk page to say that you've removed the names, but arguably the mere fact that the article contained the names at a particular date and time is enough hint for anybody so-minded to dig them out of the history, so it might be better for the talk page comment to be removed as well. As it appears that the user who wrote it is blocked, someone else would have to do it. Again though, I'd like to leave this judgment to a more experienced editor. Scil100 (talk) 08:32, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't think there's sufficient policy justification for removing the talk page comment. WP:BLPTALK allows for comments that themselves violate BLP to be removed from a talk page but related discussions are usually retained. January (talk) 07:42, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
The main thing is getting the full info out of the article as that gets used all over the internet for generating pages like on facebook etc. Things on talk pages get archived after a while anyway and to see the mention on the talk page people would have to read through a lot of other information anyway.RafikiSykes (talk) 10:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay, many thanks for the explanation. (As you can no doubt tell, I'm inexperienced on this issue, but I do want to get it right.) Based on this, I'll post a brief reply on the talk page to say that the names have now been removed. Scil100 (talk) 11:04, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Jack Hoban

Please "undelete" the page about Jack Hoban. It is not in violation of any Wikipedia rules. Thank you. Mtpublicaffairs (talk) 21:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

As we discussed previously, the article was deleted by consensus per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Hoban. You may still challenge the outcome at WP:Deletion review if you wish. January (talk) 22:07, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

We created a brand new page and used citiations for each bit of information. Please depost it and stop deleting it. Thank you. Mtpublicaffairs (talk) 06:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

The recreations did not include any new information or sources which would have addressed the problems raised in the deletion discussion. January (talk) 07:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. It was 3 or 4 brand new sentences and each one had a proper citation using the Wikipedia program. Please repost the page or stop deleting it. Thank you.Mtpublicaffairs (talk) 15:01, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

There was no new information or independent sources, so there was nothing in the recreated version which would not have been taken into account in the discussion in July that led to the previous deletion.
If you wish to contest this deletion further, please raise it at WP:Deletion review. January (talk) 15:11, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Protocols and Standards Re: Tags

On August 29 you Added

tag to the article on Andre Julian, which has since been edited to address your concerns. I have 2 questions regarding the protocol for adding/removing tags and regarding Wiki standards. 1) Who is allowed to remove the tags: you as orignator, you or any administrator, or any editor? 2) Some Wiki pages have few (e.g., David Gross) or even no references or citations, so what is Wiki policy or what are Wiki standards regarding these articles (e.g., is any editor allowed to add a tag)? Thank you in advance. (PS How did you find the time to edit so may articles??) Ann12h (talk) 19:34, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

There are no requirements as to who can and can't remove a tag. Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup has more information about the use of these templates. Looking at the article however, I can still see three paragraphs with no in-line citations, and the longest paragraph only appears to have one fact cited.
Also, are you the copyright holder of the photo? The description page seems contradictory, the source is self-made but the permission field says that it was e-mailed by Andre Julian. January (talk) 10:33, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
That is why I mentioned David Gross as an example (and there are many other examples on Wiki). Gross has 6 paragraphs in his bio and 5 have no inline citations. The 1 citation that is provided is a whimsical reference to his membership in the Princeton String Quartet. Mr. Julian's bio is far more cited and I thought the citations were made, as per your tag, much more precise.
I agree that the photo copyright may appear contradictory, but that was the result of clicking on the appropriate categories in the process. Mr. Julian eMailed the photo granting full rights and permission to put that photo into the public domain. The source is certainly self made. It is also a self made image in the sense I ran the photo through a Macromedia editor. Bottom line: I am the owner of that image and I placed the photo into the public domain. (I just noticed that the photo has been flagged for transfer to Commons and I suppose I will have to do so. Hopefully that process is straight forward and hassle free.)
In my opinion, the Julian and Gross articles both provide information and references to sufficiently verify that the subjects are who they say they are. Bios of living persons can be tricky, e.g., how do we cite that "Gross's hobby is fishing" or "Julian's parents got divorced" without resorting to significant expenditures of effort. As long as the information is credible and not controversial, shouldn't we simply use common sense as the major criterion for this kind of information (and only this kind of information)? I believe the Gross and the Julian articles to be perfectly acceptable. If you were me, would you remove the footnotes tag?
This article has taken up much more time than anticipated, and issues unrelated to content certainly impacted my time allocation. I would like to be done with it and I would rather contribute to so many other articles on Wiki that need strengthening. But that still begs my original question to you: "How have you found the time to edit so many articles?" Ann12h (talk) 16:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia's verifiability policy is that content should be verified by reliable sources, information about family background should certainly be verified; otherwise we have no way of knowing if it has previously been published. The tag should be changed to {{BLP sources}} if this information cannot be found in the existing references.
Regarding the photograph, please could you also verify the permission by forwarding the e-mail to the address found in WP:DCM#Granting us permission to copy material already online? I noticed in the history that it's been deleted once already and this will prevent it happening again.
Difficult to answer your last question beyond saying this is how I spend some of my spare time. January (talk) 16:47, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Clay Borrell

Clay Borrell is a musician from Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is known very well by many teenage girls across the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClayJoc (talk • contribs) 18:28, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

The article was deleted because it gave no indication of meeting Wikipedia's inclusion criteria for musicians, which are set out in WP:MUSICBIO. We also strongly discourage editors from creating articles about themselves, please see WP:Autobiography. January (talk) 18:37, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

AllScamsForum.Com

Hi, Could you please confirm the removal of AllScamsForum.Com link from the E-mail fraud wiki page. AFAIK there should not be a problem with this. Similar link like http://www.millersmiles.co.uk/ are allowed to exist here. AllScamsForum.Com hosts largest scam awareness community on Facebook. AllScamsForum.Com is where thousands of real reported email fraud samples are searchable. It should be allowed for public good, my2c. Himan577 (talk) 05:24, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Appreciate your review comments, Thanks. Himan577 (talk) 07:47, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Himan577 (talk • contribs) 02:04, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I removed the link per Wikipedia's guidelines on external links. Forums and Facebook sites are both listed as types of link to be avoided, please see WP:ELNO point 10. Also your user page suggests that you run this site, per Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines it is recommended not to link to a site you own or represent without prior discussion (please see WP:ADV). January (talk) 11:15, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. Appreciate it. One clarification I would like to put forth - although the name of the site has a "forum" in it, the main purpose of it to act as a repository/database of reported scams. The wiki page E mail fraud is meant to provide information about different types of scams but the person reading it will be most probably interested in knowing whether the particular email that he has received is a scams or not. So the external links section points him to a location where it is possible to do that. Because of WP:ADV I would request you to please restore the link, if you happen to agree with the my clarification. Thanks for your time. Himan577 (talk) 12:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I would still consider this link unsuitable per WP:ELNO, however you may like to take this up at WP:External links/Noticeboard if you would like further input. January (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Louie Gohmert article vandalism and NPOV issues

I noticed you are an administrator. The article Louie Gohmert had continuously been vandalized by an user. He has tried to avoid detection by using three IP address 99.168.72.86, 75.60.185.120, 75.60.186.187 and two user names Jdblack326 and Johnnyb.3261. The IP addresses all trace back to Columbus, Ohio and have the edits are all revert attempts to edit and a section in the article entitled "Implication Obama is complicit in creating a Islamic Caliphate." The community in on this article has reached a conseus that the title "Statements regarding Obama policies toward the Middle East," is a better title because it is more NPOV. Furthermore, there is a debate on if these quotes should be included at all. The "Terror Babies" incident obviously should because it did garner a create deal of national attention, but the other two are only cited by Talking Points Memo and directly from CSPAN and did not garner much attention outside of the left wing blogosphere. The section College of Fine Art director incident was also listed on Taking points memo but the line section entitled Statements regarding "Obama policies toward the Middle East" was not very notable at all. It attempting to cherry picking data to quite frankly make Louie Gohmert look stupid. I have added sections on his political views to the article because I believe if these "Controversies" sections are to be left in people should at least get the whole picture. It's unfair to the reader to not give them the information and allow them to create their own opinions based on the facts.

Thanks for your time and consideration.

best,

--Andy0093 (talk) 15:27, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Having looked through the edits, I agree there are concerns with NPOV but at this point I don't think there is anything I can do in terms of administrator actions. The edits (apart from the self-reference to the article itself) are not exactly vandalism, and the different IPs/accounts are not being used simultaneously and don't show signs of being used to give the illusion that this is several different users or to circumvent WP:3RR. Since the discussion on the talk page about the addition only involved one other editor, it may be worth getting wider input and more eyes on the article by raising at WP:BLPN. January (talk) 21:47, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Good idea. Thanks for your input. I'm going to try to engage the community more.

--Andy0093 (talk) 00:22, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Forgot to add, thanks pointing out that it wasn't quite vandalism. As a new user, I'm learning new things about Wikipedia everyday!

--Andy0093 (talk) 02:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I removed the quotes have attempted to engage the community. I point out the only sources cited were Talking Points Memo and CSpan and pointed to wikipedia guidelines on reliable sources and controversial articles. Thanks again for all your help.

--Andy0093 (talk) 22:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Barbara Acklin

Could you make the deleted text of the article available for me to check through? I've now rewritten the article completely, but would like to see if any additional verified information was added to the old article after the copyright violations took place, which I can then include in the new article. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I've temporarily undone a Revdel so the last revision before it was blanked can now be seen in the history (please let me know when I can reinstate it). January (talk) 11:54, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
All done now, thank you very much. I haven't included any of the unverified additions from the old version - much better now! Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:07, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Small request

Could you please remove this user's talk page access? In addition to all the rest, the user removed your block template while blocked. CityOfSilver 19:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Done, thanks. January (talk) 19:12, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Survey

Hi January!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 03:25, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Vivienne Westwood

Hi January. The edit protection expired not long ago and the sock returned, the same one with the misleading edit summary spelling mistake. Could you please extend the edit protection? Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:08, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Protected for another month. January (talk) 08:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. --Muhandes (talk) 11:54, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

An odd sequence of events

I was hoping you could help me get to the bottom of some very strange goings on here. A couple of weeks ago, User:Sherylanne (since indef blocked as a vandalism only acct) moved my user page to User:Corgan123. I have no idea what the meaning of that was. User:The Bushranger kindly moved it back. Yesterday, I got a message from User:Dipankan001 concerning the speedy deletion of Corgan China. I have no knowledge whatsoever of that article; I assume it was in some way tied to the User:Corgan123 mystery account. Now this same user, User:Dipankan001, has reported me at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. I have used this name for almost a year without incident, and don't understand what could possibly be objectionable about it. I assume all of these bizarre events are in some way tied together. As you were the administrator who responded at the noticeboard, I was wondering if you could possibly offer me any insight as to what may be going on here. Regards. Joefromrandb (talk) 01:06, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I think this is how it happened: when your user and talk page were moved back to the correct location, that created a redirect from Corgan123's talk page to yours. Dipankan001 tagged a page created by Corgan123 for speedy deletion using Twinkle, which generates an automatic notification to the page creator. The redirect caused the notification to go to your talk page instead of Corgan123's. Dipankan001 must have thought you were in some way responsible for that but that's clearly not the case, there's definitely no problem with your username. The redirect has since been deleted so there shouldn't be any further problems. January (talk) 11:51, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm still wondering who this User:Corgan123 is (was?-the account seems to have disappeared) and why User:Sherylanne whom I don't know from Adam would target me for page-move vandalism. I just hope this kind of scenario doesn't continue to pop up in the future. Thanks for responding. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:50, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Corgan123's edits were promoting a business of that name and were deleted for that reason, which is why they no longer have any contributions showing publicly. January (talk) 18:03, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I just had a chance to read your message about my edit of "A Night in Tunisia (1960 album"). As a new user to Wikipedia, I appreciate your comments and will highly welcome any tips or help that will make a better user of Wikipedia. Once again, thanks for your comments.--Reallyconfused (talk) 04:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Vivienne Westwood

Could you please extend the protection of Vivienne Westwood? As you can see, it took the sock 24 minutes from the moment the protection was removed till they vandalized again. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 15:56, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

It was one sock this time round which has been blocked, they haven't descended on the article with multiple socks like before and there hasn't been any activity in the last 24 hours, so I'm not sure there's quite enough to justify a protection at this point. I have the article watchlisted and I'll protect if it gets out of control. January (talk) 16:18, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, all I needed to know is that I can remove it from my own watch list :) Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Alan Clemmons bio

I am trying to change the Bio for Alan Clemmons to the most current version. If you will look at http://people.forbes.com/profile/alan-d-clemmons/79831 They have updated the Bio. Also it would be nice to take out the Alan D. Clemmons and just make it Alan Clemmons. I am new to this stuff and for some reason it got reverted back to an old version.

Can you help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.74.36.218 (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

The Forbes website is copyrighted, copying the biography directly from there is copyright violation - that's why the article has been reverted to the version before this material was added. If you do have permission to use this text, please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for details of how to go about confirming this.
Regarding the name, this would need to be changed by moving the page (see WP:MOVE), the relevant guideline for naming articles is WP:COMMONNAME. As an IP editor, you won't have the option available to move the page yourself but you could request a move using the WP:Requested moves process. January (talk) 22:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Ahha I see what you are talking about now. I will check on this. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.74.36.218 (talk) 22:17, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

g6

The Resilient Barnstar

The Resilient Barnstar
well i know its none of my business... and its not!! but really, thank you, i mean, you did that deletion for housekeeping and thats good, thank you january and thank you ok thank you Puffin Let's talk! 21:25, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Reviewing deleted Article

This article about Celebrity Cricket League was deleted by you as the result of deletion discussion process, But it got more importance now because of new session and more public interest. And few new teams also joined, making it serious cricket(even they got logos and sponsors, it is no more a game in the front yard) for various celebrities of Indian states/language. It will be great if you can review the deletion process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.207.180.207 (talk) 08:22, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest you contact User:Stifle in the first instance as he/she is the administrator who closed the deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celebrity Cricket League (I only deleted an attempt to repost the same article less than a week later). If after discussion with the closing administrator you are not satisfied with the outcome, you have the option of raising it at WP:Deletion review. January (talk) 12:10, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Anton Mosimann

Thanks for finding that picture. Having started the article I always thought the lack of a decent photo was its major weakness. William Avery (talk) 10:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I was pleased with that find. It was a stroke of luck, it appeared on a useful Flickr account I keep an eye on. January (talk) 16:23, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Hi January. FYI and [3]. Thank you. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 10:47, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

The article was fully protected. Maybe the protecting admin thought the dispute was between the two of us. Regardless, you win some you lose some. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 04:46, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, thank you for your input to the article. I've been struggling with that on my own for a while now. January (talk) 17:06, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
No problem. Just trying to help you out. Personally the subject of the article leaves me completely indifferent to say the least. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 20:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi January, why have you not replied to my latest point in the discussion of above article, with regards not citing for the 5 year term as it is in the state's constitution?

87.228.193.254 (talk) 16:09, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Your last comment? The comment I didn't reply to came from the 212 IP who said they were an independent observer who supported your position [4]. January (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
IP 212. Is known to me, <redacted> but he is not me i'm an entrepreneur my name is Yiannis, you seem to be accusing me of using sock puppetry, please refrain from doing that it is unfair and unsubstantiated and can be seen as harassment so that what you believe is correct goes in the article. Now I have noticed your reply which is still unsatisfactory. I think the Cypriot constitution takes precedence over any sort of citation! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.228.193.254 (talk) 17:58, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
You should not be posting other people's personal information without their consent, see WP:OUTING.
How did you both find yourselves involved in the same dispute? January (talk) 18:16, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
It's a funny story,we are season ticket holders at the same Cypriot football club,our seats are adjacent we have both contributed to improving certain Cypriot football club entries on Wikipedia mostly of the club we support. When I added what you are labelling as POV section on the CBC governor it was after reports on Cypriot TV you removed them asking for citations which I added you then said that was not good enough. Given 212 profession, I told him to have at look at the discussion and use his admittedly deeper knowledge on the subject to first see if what I had added was fair. The rest you can see on the discussion. I apologise for inadvertently giving bits of his Id but it appeared necessary to prove to you that we are not in fact one and the same!

87.228.193.254 (talk) 20:30, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

You previously claimed to have no relation to this user [5], and the other user claimed to be an "independent observer" when in fact you had asked them to involve themselves in the dispute. I would suggest both of you take a look at WP:MEAT. January (talk) 20:42, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
what is wrong with asking someone to independently judge if what you are writing is fair? He is not a close friend or relative and on his own free will he took part in the discussion, I just pointed it out to him! Dear oh dear January your over eagerness to keep the article as is, means you are trying to use all sort of Wikipedia rules to prevent ANY edits to the article!!

87.228.143.217 (talk) 20:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

January, you are implying I'm a "meatpuppet" this is defamatory, please retract this harrasment. It is indeed quite ingenious the methods you are using to prevail in the "Edit War" of the Athanasios Orphanides article. Anything in the wikipedia rules just to get your version through. Let me clarify what I meant by "independent" observer and why I consider myself to be one, even though you don't seem to believe Yiannis. For a start I'm called Stavros and I work in a Cypriot bank. Yiannis is an aquaintance, he is not a friend nor a relative. You must realise that in a country as small as Cyprus you cannot strictly apply these universal Wikipedia rules on sock puppetry and the like, for the simple reason that our whole population is around 750K-800K, we are a small nation and almost everyone is "aquainted" to the other!! Yiannis who I know from football games of our favourite Nicosia team asked me to fact check his addition to the Orphanides article, he didn't ask me to take his side or tip the argument in his favour, in fact he told me <please do a "sanity check" and fairness check on what I have added>. If I with my better knowledge on banking issues would have found his additions unfair, defamatory or with undue weight I would have had no qualms to say so, in the discussion on the topic. The fact that I didn't and agreed with him does not mean I'm his "meatpuppet"!! I am using my independent judgement that you seem not to value and are discounting completly.

Moving on to another subject though, why have you started behind our backs a "sock puppetry" investigation of Yiannis and myself? This is a bit naughty when on the one hand you are involved in an "edit war" with Yiannis and on the other hand you are using other methods to intimediate him and get him to stop his good faith edits. I would have expected an experienced wikipedia administrator as yourself to not bite off the head of newbies like us on this encyclopedia and assume good faith. In actual fact you write these principles on your discussion page where in fact all you are doing is "teasing out" info from us and then "telling" on us for sockpuppetry!!! How is this fair??? Lastly please reply to my point as to why the Orphanides article is slanted towards pre-2007 research/events and no mention at all is made of his recent actions as central bank governor between 2007-2012. This is undue weight and a slanted representation of a living person and you watchlisting the article and preventing the addition of a section on his record as governor from user 87. is basically perpetuation this slanted view. Who on earth is Geostavr who added the beer image I certainly don't know him and I'm not his "Muppet"!!! 62.12.95.225 (talk) 06:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I started the SPI because I did not find it plausible that the two of you were unconnected editors, and as is now acknowledged you are not unconnected although you both previously claimed you were. It was actually because it was clear that something strange was going on that I withdrew from the discussion. As for the additions, the material removed was inadequately sourced which does not comply with WP:V and WP:SYNTH (another editor agrees with me on this). You are reading far too much into my motives which have only ever been about ensuring compliance with WP policy. There has absolutely never been any intention of intimidation or harassment on my part. January (talk) 12:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough January, I see all you want is a strict application of rules, there may be a cultural clash here as well, in the sense that English people as yourself love rules while a Cypriot like me does not like following rules blindly in cases where the constitution of a country (the UK has no written constitution so maybe this prevents you from understanding that this is the most important document or evidence in a country with a written constitution) clearly says the term is 5 years and the president has absolute right to renew. I would be interested to see your response to ip 212 point that the article focuses too much on research prior to the post of Governor. Are you doing anything to rectify this in a way that follows all these rules?

87.228.193.254 (talk) 13:34, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I've explained why I withdrew from the discussion, and I certainly do not feel that we can have any sort of constructive discussion while these insults and ad hominem arguments directed towards me continue. I have already suggested a couple of places where you can raise it if you think there is a neutrality issue with the article as it stands. January (talk) 10:15, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Poor excuse for keeping the article as is and biased.

87.228.193.254 (talk) 21:34, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:Non-free images with orphaned versions more than 7 days old

Thank you for helping deal with the backlog at Category:Non-free images with orphaned versions more than 7 days old. Please note, however, that merely deleting the old versions of the iage doesn't remove it from the category - pleasse also remove the {{orphaned fair use revisions}} tag from the image description page. While a bot to do this does aparently exist, when a call for admins to clear out the category is made, and multiple admins are doing it at the same time, these images should be removed in real time. As far as I can tell, the bot doesn't actually do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Od Mishehu (talk • contribs) 13:18, 18 December 2011‎ (UTC)

Merry X'mas~!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.


Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

A belated Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you, Dave. January (talk) 18:07, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Keep or delete copyright-restricted File:The 1996 Person of the Year (Time Magazine) - Dr. David Da-i Ho.jpg?

Hello. As your http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Time_Person_of_the_Year&diff=prev&oldid=468646768 would make Time Person of the Year disuse this copyright-restricted magazine cover and thus invalidate the fair use rationale, I would like to discuss whether to keep this copyright-restricted magazine cover in these three articles without rationale explained: AIDS, Antiretroviral drug, David Ho (scientist). I consider that Time Person of the Year would be the only desirable article to ever use the copyright-restricted magazine cover if a very good rationale ever exists. Otherwise, this cover should likely get out of English Wikipedia. Thanks.--Jusjih (talk) 14:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC) (administrator asking administrator)

Personally I don't think it meets WP:NFCC#8 in any article, to my mind the reader does not need to see him on the cover of Time Magazine to understand that he was Time Person of the Year and I don't think it would be a significant detriment to any of those articles if it were removed, particularly as there is a good-quality image of Ho on Commons which could be used instead. The uploader obviously disagrees as they're continuing to add it to other articles, so I've started a discussion at WP:Non-free content review#David Ho (scientist) on cover of Time Magazine. January (talk) 17:36, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I agree you that we may not even need the magazine cover here.--Jusjih (talk) 18:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Block evasion

90.208.164.22 (talk) appears to be the same person as 90.208.164.41 (talk), both are vandalizing UK gameshow and football club articles and have very similar IP addresses. J9 91 19:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Update: It appears a large range of 90.208.164 IP addresses have been vandalizing UK TV, football and political articles. They are most likely all the same person; a rangeblock may be needed. J9 91 19:50, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

The last edit from the .22 IP was in November. Is there an IP currently active? January (talk) 20:53, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the .41 IP was recently blocked for 31 hours for vandalism on the Popstars (UK) article.

15 January 2012

13 January 2012


17 November 2011

15 November 2011

13 November 2011

10 November 2011

8 November 2011


26 November 2011

22 November 2011


All these IPs have similar edits and have been blocked for vandalism. Yet the disruption continues. J9 91 20:58, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry what I meant was, did another IP start vandalising after I blocked the .41 IP? January (talk) 21:14, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely, because IPs take a while to change. However, the admins think these 90.208.164 addresses are different users, so each is given a common 31 hour block instead of escalating blocks, as a result it's never long before the user can edit again. J9 91 21:57, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree that it's probably the same person, but I think the IP switching would need to be more frequent to consider a rangeblock. (I'll admit that rangeblocking is not an area I'm particularly knowledgeable in, so I won't mind if you want to get a second opinion on that.) January (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Forums etc

Hello

I am contacting you after a request received on OTRS. Apparently, there is a little "hidden" war between someone from the World Economic Forum and someone from the Crans Montana Forum for the publishing of images of famous people with the logo of the respective forums appearing on the photos. Eh. Advertisement is good everywhere :) My recommandation to the person who wrote to OTRS was to either live with it or actually modify images so that the mention of the "other" forum would not appear on the picture. I am not quite sure it is appropriate to rework images in that sense, but I feel it might be a way to avoid being too much used as an advertisement plateform :) I just dropped this word to you as you are the last one which restored the image on Huguette Labelle. Best ! Anthere (talk)

Is it Crans Montana Forum making the query? If so I think they're mistaken in assuming that the people they've been edit-warring with are from the World Economic Forum. The WEF have a Flickr account on which all of the images are freely licensed, and editors frequently search Flickr for suitable images (I've uploaded a few WEF images myself). The Labelle image was uploaded and first added to the article by User:Puramyun31, who uploads from various Flickr sources and I'm sure doesn't have any COI with the WEF. It's not unusual to caption the image stating where it was taken, although I agree it probably is good for the WEF's profile, that may be why they freely license their images. I switched back to the WEF image in the Labelle article because I thought it was the better of the two, but their other two uploads are still in use. If Crans Montana Forum intend to continue donating images, I think they should be aware that the decision on which image we use in an article is an editorial one and we wouldn't guarantee that their images would be used. January (talk) 18:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes it is CMF. I'll clarify further the point with them so as to make sure they go on contributing images :) Thanks for the details. Anthere (talk) 18:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Kat Von D

This is a neutral notice of an RfC for a page on which you have been an editor. If you wish to participate, the discussion is taking place here. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Matt Hammitt

How do I go about it to prove he is indeed notable for a solo article on Wikipedia?HotHat (talk) 07:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

The relevant guideline is WP:MUSICBIO, the article needs evidence that he meets one of the criteria listed individually (not just as a member of Sanctus Real). For example, if his solo album charted or if his activities outside the band have received significant media coverage that would demonstrate notability. January (talk) 18:22, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Is this enough to sufficiently prove WP:MUSICBIO? I know he has satisfied No. 1 and No. 2, I also think is satisfied as well, but I will let you determine that as well. For the sources go to HotHat/Matt Hammitt.HotHat (talk) 00:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I have remade the article and I have proven notability!HotHat (talk) 08:28, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, I think there are sufficient sources there. January (talk) 10:47, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Man or Woman, I did not know that is all it took now I will go and create others! I got kind of side tracked by other things but when I saw it was redirected I knew I had to get it fixed pronto!HotHat (talk) 11:52, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Justin Bieber

Hi,I m Mukta Sawant from India. And thinking of creating Wikiproject page 4 Justin Bieber.If u wish 2 help me reply it on ur page & pls I wanna Listen yes (116.203.63.51 (talk) 07:28, 28 January 2012 (UTC))

MSU Interview

Dear January,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:07, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Re-open a deleted article

Hi,

I've been trying to edit this article [[6]] and I have seen that you have deleted it because of copyright problems. I have the permission of owner and all information about this article and I'd like to write it. Please tell me what I have to do for open the article and write it again.

Thanks.

A Alonso www.aid.gl — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.56.204.65 (talk) 09:29, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

We would need confirmation of permission, either by e-mail or a notice at the website the material was taken from. Please see WP:DCM#Granting us permission to copy material already online for more information about this and the e-mail address to send the confirmation to. January (talk) 18:39, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Gracie Cole, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Westcott (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

One Direction Brit Award jpg

about the jpg what can i the uploader do to keep save it from deletion. i went to non-free pages i read the it still didn't quite understannd. i did change the purpose. what can i do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdabowtheSecond (talk • contribs) 14:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't think there is any way the use of this image can comply with the non-free criteria. The first criteria is that there must be no free equivalent and we already have free images of the band, there's really no way round that. January (talk) 15:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Kim Dalton

I know where you are coming from regarding the 'synth' issue but what was your problem with the primary source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duckquackquack (talk • contribs) 00:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

It's tied in with the synth issue - WP:PRIMARY specifies "Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself". It also states that such sources should be used with care; using the report as the source for the date of it's own release is fairly uncontroversial as the relevance is established by a cited secondary source having previously noted the report was forthcoming, but selecting quotes to help present a particular point of view are not a use that complies with either WP:PRIMARY or WP:SYNTH in my opinion. January (talk) 12:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:January/Archive_3&oldid=1146529796"