Jump to content

User talk:Armbrust/Archive 16: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has a Global Account.
This user has autoconfirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has extended confirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has autopatrolled rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has file mover rights on the English Wikipedia
This user is not an admin.
This user is an Articles for Creation reviewer on the English Wikipedia.
This user has AutoWikiBrowser permissions on the English Wikipedia.
This user uses Twinkle.
This user uses HotCat to work with categories.
This user watches over Wikipedia with the help of Navigation popups!
This user helped get 2011 World Snooker Championship listed on the "In the News" section of the main page on May 3, 2011.
This user has signed Jimbo's guestbook
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Werieth (talk | contribs)
54,678 edits
→‎ANRFC: comment
Line 482: Line 482:
:::That's nonsense. But placing them between a {{tl|cot}} and {{tl|cob}} will be enough for now. [[User:Armbrust|Armbrust]] <sup>[[User talk:Armbrust|<font color="#E3A857">The</font> <font color="#008000">Homunculus</font>]]</sup> 14:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
:::That's nonsense. But placing them between a {{tl|cot}} and {{tl|cob}} will be enough for now. [[User:Armbrust|Armbrust]] <sup>[[User talk:Armbrust|<font color="#E3A857">The</font> <font color="#008000">Homunculus</font>]]</sup> 14:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
::::You may think its nonsense, because you are not involved in that area, but this is far beyond a normal backlog. There have been discussions that have been open for just under 6 months. The normal discussion length is 7 days. Having discussions unclosed for 6 months is problematic. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 14:48, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
::::You may think its nonsense, because you are not involved in that area, but this is far beyond a normal backlog. There have been discussions that have been open for just under 6 months. The normal discussion length is 7 days. Having discussions unclosed for 6 months is problematic. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 14:48, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

* When closing please remember to subst: the archive template. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 16:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
When closing please remember to subst: the archive template. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 16:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
:I don't think that's needed there, as it's not a board-specific template. If you disagree, than feel free to subst them, but I will not do it. [[User:Armbrust|Armbrust]] <sup>[[User talk:Armbrust|<font color="#E3A857">The</font> <font color="#008000">Homunculus</font>]]</sup> 16:38, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:38, 28 January 2014


    Back to the top
    Hello! Please click here to post a new message. Thank you!

    Claiming award from WP:REWARD

    Hey Armbrust! I've expanded Plumbeous Water Redstart, one of the articles on the list. While I've removed the stub category tag on the article, the talk page stub rating remains unchanged. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

     Awards delivered. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Number of professional snooker players this season

    Hi Armbrust, I've been reading the article entitled "Snooker season 2013/2014" and thought that you would be the best person to ask about it as you seem to have updated the article more than anybody else.

    I notice it says: "The 2013/2014 season was made up of 131 professional players." I'm presuming this includes the top 129 players in the world rankings after seeding revision 4 as well as Igor Figueiredo and Ben Judge. Am I therefore correct in assuming that the reason you didn't adjust that number to 130 on November 4 (when seeding revision 4 was issued) was purely on the basis that Ben Judge was included on seeding revisions 2 and 3 (therefore a professional this season prior to September 23) and not because you believe that he is currently a professional?

    Is there some sort of participation criteria that national governing body nominations must meet in order to preserve their professional status? It's not clear to me why Floyd Ziegler and Ben Judge (both given a tour card for 2012/13-2013/14) have both been removed from the world rankings list prematurely.

    Kind regards. Standingfish (talk) 05:40, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Exactly as you say. There were 131 professional players on the tour this season, because Ben Judge was officially a professional until the seeding revision 4 came out. AFAIK there is no such a criteria, but both Floyd Ziegler and Ben Judge have resigned their WPBSA membership and with this lost their professional status. In Ben Judge's case this was officially confirmed by the WPBSA. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks very much for your reply. Following on from the point discussed, as Ben Judge was officially a professional until the seeding revision 4 came out, then that means that Floyd Ziegler was officially a professional until seeding revision 2 came out. Therefore, a professional prior to July 22, which means that he was also a professional this season.
    Obviously the ranking list issued after a World Championship (seeding revision 1 in this case where Ziegler is included) is different to the other ranking lists in the sense that it also includes players (like Andy Hicks) who have not met the qualification criteria to remain on the tour for the subsequent seeding period.
    However, Ziegler has met the criteria by virtue of the fact that he was given a two-year tour card at the start of the 2012/13 season. Therefore, surely we have to assume that he is still a professional until we are given official confirmation that he is no longer a professional - which didn't come until July 22.
    Obviously I'll leave this up to you to decide what to do for the best. Just thought I'd offer a few thoughts on the matter.
    All the best, Standingfish (talk) 03:57, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Well Floyd Ziegler wasn't on World Snooker's Tour Players 2013/2014 list, and therefore he can't be included without original research. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Excellent point. The official confirmation came on June 19. Technically though, he could have still resigned his WPBSA membership at any stage between day 1 of the Wuxi Classic Qualifiers on May 27 and when the list of tour players was issued on June 19. Had his resignation occurred during this period, it's unlikely he would have been included on the June 19 list with him being an ex-WPBSA member at that stage. I totally agree with you though. As we are unsure, we have no option but to go by the June 19 list and treat it as if it was accurate as of May 27.
    All the best,
    Standingfish (talk) 05:34, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 04 December 2013

    Thank you! (Keithbob)

    Thanks for noting my close of Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility ‎on the WP:ANRFC page. Twas my last edit of the day and I was so tired I forgot :-( — Keithbob • Talk • 14:16, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Be my guest. Noting the closure is by far more easier, than doing it. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Tfd close

    I've removed the tag from the template page and posted the Tfd discussion template on the talk page. However, the talk page template links to another discussion instead of linking here. This is my first Tfd close so maybe there is a nuance I'm not getting. Any suggestions?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:54, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    That's because date in this case is also used to generate the link and therefore the date after "Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/" is needed for that. (BTW these steps should be made for every template in multi-page nominations. In these case the section name parameter is also need.) Armbrust The Homunculus 22:00, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Right, when I've closed AfD's the instruction is to take the Old Afd Multi template from within the AfD template at the top of the page and use it to create the talk page template, but the instruction page for Tfd's doesn't say that. Instead is says use this: {Tfd end|section heading|date=date of nomination|result=result} -- — Keithbob • Talk • 22:29, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, now I see the issue. I entered the Nomination Date (Oct 28) per the Tfd instruction page BUT..... since the Tfd was relisted the close appears on the Nov 5th page. So I should have inserted Nov 5 instead of Oct 28 to get the correct link. Thanks for helping me clear this up. Cheers! -- — Keithbob • Talk • 22:31, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 11 December 2013

    Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Railway
    Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
    Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Edouard Manet - Le Chemin de fer - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Jujutacular (talk) 19:17, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for closing it. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:21, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    3rd maximum break official video (snooker)

    Hello Armbrust, Due to, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maximum_break&action=history. I am Mr.Com who changed 3rd maximum break video to the official one at 14:32, 14 December 2013. By giving the reason that it contains more than just the maximum break, you changed it back to the original one at 15:56, 14 December 2013‎. I would like to ask you that does the official video violate any rule of wikipedia? I prefer the official one because of its quality and it contains the 'complete' frame (including an interview about the maximum break from both players). Cheers!! Mr.Com (talk) 07:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    No, it doesn't violate any policy, but the article is called maximum break. The goal of the video links is to show, how the maximum breaks were compiled and there is no reason to link to content, which is unrelated to topic of the article. In this case the last frame of the match or the interview has no relevance. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Maximum break

    This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
    The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
    Stop icon
    Your recent editing history at Maximum break shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

    To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    @The Rambling Man: Okay, I understand that, but where is the same warning for NickSt? I can't edit war alone. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    You've made three reversions to different editors in quick succession. But I have warned him as well. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 18 December 2013

    Category:Fisheries conservation organizations

    I have closed the CFD discussion of Category:Fisheries conservation organizations as: Split' to Category:Fish conservation organizations and Category:Fisheries conservation organizations.

    Since a split needs to be done manually, I have listed the category at WP:CFD/W/M#Split. As nominator, would you like to be volunteered to do the splitting? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:58, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, mostly by DASonnenfeld. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:59, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Changes to WP:RESTRICT

    Hello Armbrust. With this edit you removed one or more 'appeal after' dates. Is this wise? I see that User:KhabarNegar was revert warring over the change to his entry, which had been stable since the original closure in June 2013. In my opinion any changes to RESTRICT which might be viewed as changing the terms of a restriction should be discussed at WP:AN or with the original closer of the sanction. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    @EdJohnston: I don't think that's a problem, or is a change that needs a discussion. IMO the "appeal after date" makes only sense, if they are future dates, and if this date was reached, than they become meaningless/redundant. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:23, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Redundancy is in the eye of the beholder. When there is a provision for 'appeal after' that suggests that a return to good behavior is being confidently assumed. If you want to repeatedly make these changes I think an AN discussion is needed. EdJohnston (talk) 17:33, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    @EdJohnston: That doesn't make any sense to me. Shall that mean, that if an "appeal after" date is not present, than "a return to good behavior" is not expected before lifting the sanction? These removals are very similar to removing expired restrictions, just in this case only a part of it expires. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:37, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    (talk page stalker)(Non-administrator comment) In my eye, entries without an 'appeal after' are not eligible for appeal. So, unless the sanction has expired and the entire entry is removed with a note on the user's talk page letting them know it has expired, such a date should not be removed without discussion. Technical 13 (talk) 17:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    @Technical 13: That's complete nonsense. According to WP:UNBAN any editor can appeal his community-based ban at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Otherwise WP:RESTRICT wouldn't have an entry for Apteva, which prohibits him from making such requests until 31 January 2014 and restrict him to only make one appeal in every six months after that. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    New Nickname

    Hello Armbrust, please put you on List of Snooker Nicknames Czech player Filip Domorád. His nickname is FD Pleška. Thank you Mr. Zmiz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.85.159.74 (talk) 09:27, 21 December 2013‎

    Filip Domorád can't be added to the article, because (1) he doesn't have an article on the English Wikipedia and (2) it's proposed entry is completely unsourced. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:30, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Tintin category changes

    Hello Armbrust, what is the status of your proposed speedy rename of the Tintin categories? Thanks. Prhartcom (talk) 15:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The discussion is still in progress, but it looks like it will not be made. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:31, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank-you for your reply. I see what you mean. As this discussion been listed and relisted both for well more than seven days, please concede the discussion should now be closed and tags should now be removed from the categories for clean-up purposes. Prhartcom (talk) 08:58, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not possible. CFD discussions can only be closed by uninvolved users. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:30, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    FP nom error

    Hi Armbrust- I made an error during a nomination (omitting the title for the nom) and went back to fix it. The nom still shows "a title for the nomination" even though I entered the title. Could you let me know how to fix this please. Many thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 09:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    You fixed it, it just didn't show up at WP:FPC, because of a caching issue. Next time just click on the "purge the page cache" link just bellow the table of contents. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:29, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Not An Admin

    Armbrust: Just an FYI, it seems that your user & talk pages show a tiny icon at the top that you are NOT an admin. Just wanted to bring it to your attention since it is confusing as is. F6697 FORMERLY 66.97.209.215 TALK 14:42, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    PS: Where can I learn more about those tiny icons?

    (talk page stalker) Probably because he is truly not an admin? ES&L 16:22, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    (talk page stalker) I don't think it is confusing to anyone else, Armbrust. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 17:38, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, the bad is mine. I saw Armbrust closing various AN/RFC and I erroneously thought Admin Noticeboard stuff needed to be closed by admins. Extending that logic I assumed Armbrust was an admin and when I saw the "not" icon figured that was a mistake. Now I know better on all of the above. :) F6697 FORMERLY 66.97.209.215 TALK 18:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Seasons Greetings


    Diannaa (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

    Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

    --Diannaa (talk) 18:14, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you Armbrust The Homunculus 21:38, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Merry Christmas!

    I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 2014!
    This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.

    Happy New Year! — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 18:47, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Armbrust The Homunculus 21:38, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    FPC

    Would it be possible to put a stop on promotions after the 27th or 28th? The Signpost wants a year-in-review feature, but it would be best if the numbers are not skewed by promotions going under the radar afterwards. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    After 28 December there is only one nomination, which ends this year (Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Portrait of a Lady (van der Weyden)). And I can't close that, as I nominated the image myself. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:25, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which is a definite pass right now, so I'll just include that. Alright, thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:09, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    File:GGYoona.png

    Hi there Armbrust, please do not delete my file File:GGYoona.png as I use it to under my userpage under the section of information of others.


    I thank you for your understanding.


    Source of INUSE: User:JialeAven9erEX/Info

    JialeAven9erEX Talk:(JialeAven9erEX) 09:55, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Per the ninth non-free criteria a non-free file can only be used in articles in the article namespace. As User:JialeAven9erEX/Info isn't in that namespace (but in the user namespace), therefore the file is eligible for speedy deletion. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:03, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 25 December 2013

    Wikipedia featured picture / File:Burj Khalifa.jpg

    Hi Armbrust, Would you give me a tip of how I can find the Wikipedia featured picture / File:Burj Khalifa.jpg will be or will not be selected in the Wikipedia Today's featured picture? Thanks in advance --Donaldtong (talk) 07:14, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The featured pictures for the Picture of the day panel of the Main Page are selected (mostly) in the order they were promoted. I don't see any reason, why this picture shouldn't be selected, but I have no idea, when this will happen. The selection of the images is done by Crisco 1492, so it would be better if you would ask him about this. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Very much appreciated for your tips Armbrust! I take this opportunity to say Happy New Year To You! --Donaldtong (talk) 01:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Happy new year to you too. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    My edit on File:MSSU1.jpg

    Hi. Sorry about my last edit! I'm not sure what I was doing… I didn't even check the bottom of the page. Once again, sorry! Corkythehornetfan (talk) 08:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    No problem. Mistakes can happen with anyone. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:35, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    File:Melbourne Luna Park at Dusk.jpg & File:Melbourne Luna Park at Dusk edit.jpg

    Hi Armbrust, May I have another question? I found Soerfm used my original image File:Melbourne Luna Park at Dusk.jpg contributed to the Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia, and then changed/eidted it as his own work/original author of the image and posted as File:Melbourne Luna Park at Dusk edit.jpg in the article Luna Park, Melbourne. Can he be entitled to do so without my consent by Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons rules? --Donaldtong (talk) 13:32, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    @Donaldtong:  Fixed the description page of the derivative file. Happy new year. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:08, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Many thanks, Armbrust, for your clarification. Likewise, happy new year to you. --Donaldtong (talk) 07:07, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    International aquatic competitions hosted in Spain

    You closed Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Category:International aquatic competitions hosted in Spain, but didn't indicate if repopulating the categories, which were emptied out-of-process, is okay or not. Armbrust The Homunculus 05:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC) Copied from Nyttend's talk page.[reply]

    The lack of indication was intentional. First off, nothing solid happened from the discussion — attempting to claim consensus from the discussion in favor of doing anything (except avoiding out-of-process emptying) would be a Wikipedia:Supervote. Finding consensus for anything, aside from ensuring that Nick stop moving categories thus, would be inappropriate. Secondly, the close was basically a "Discussion's dead without a solid conclusion" close; I don't think we should consider any new decisions to have been reached. If you seek consensus for anything, I'd suggest that you start a new discussion, since the old one had simply stopped attracting input. I don't particularly see, however, why you believe that it's necessary to have an indication of whether repopulating the categories, which were emptied out-of-process, is okay or not. I'd suggest that you go ahead, since you're basically putting things back to the status quo ante bellum. Nyttend (talk) 05:27, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    PS, I just noticed your edit to the "requests for closure" page. FYI, I didn't see that request until now; I simply came across the long unresolved discussion and came to the conclusion that everyone would benefit from a closure, either because the issue was done or because it would get restarted. Nyttend (talk) 05:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, repopulated the categories. Armbrust The Homunculus 05:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Portrait of a Lady (van der Weyden)
    Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
    Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Rogier van der Weyden - Portrait of a Lady - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for closing it. Armbrust The Homunculus 03:40, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't mention it. Rather than have it wait for hours? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:46, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, quite honestly, I totally forget about it during the previous day. Happy new year to you, BTW. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:00, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks, you too. The first 13 hours of 2014 have been quite enjoyable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:08, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Not Admin topicon

    Hi. I'm interested on that top icon to use on my user page. But I don't find it. Did you create it? Because this is the first time I see that top icon. Nice one. --Zyma (talk) 11:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    It's at {{Not Admin Topicon}}, and was createad by Darth Stabro in 2010. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:36, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. --Zyma (talk) 11:38, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lithium-Cove

    Thanks for taking care of all that paperwork--it's greatly appreciated. Also, happy new year. Drmies (talk) 15:20, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    I was searching something to close... and fortunately there was something. Happy new year to you too. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 01 January 2014

    commons:File:The Day the Earth Smiled - PIA17172.jpg

    It seems you put FP tag only in the EN page; not in original Common source. So people have no way to find an FP. It is better you add it at original Commons description page as {{Assessments|enwiki=1|enwiki-nom=The Day The Earth Smiled}} . Jee 14:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    I never add that tag to the Commons description page. (From time to time Julia W does it.) Also the local tag is needed for categorization of the files. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:16, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    As these are collaborative works, it is more than enough, if Julia W is doing it. Thanks, both of you. Jee 15:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome, ;) I add the en FP assessments tag to recently promoted files every few weeks or so (sometimes a wee bit longer if I'm really busy). Julia\talk 16:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for acting on Aon move

    in regard to move of Aon plc to Aon (company). I do like to see multiple people input to a process like this so it does not end up being a single person's engagement. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:06, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Yeah, I almost every time skip the closure of such discussions. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:40, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Claiming award from WP:REWARD (2nd time)

    Hey Armbrust! I've expanded Mangrove Robin, one of the articles on the list. While I've removed the stub category tag on the article, the talk page stub rating remains unchanged. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

     Awards delivered. @Crisco 1492: There is another FP on Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused ready for the main page. This time it's File:Peneoenanthe pulverulenta - Cairns Esplanade.jpg. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 01:29, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Awesome. Scheduled for 30 January. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, the reward magic worked again. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:49, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 08 January 2014

    Apologies

    My apologies for the errant revert on Wikipedia:Featured pictures not sure how trhat happened! All good wishes Theroadislong (talk) 19:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    No problem, a misclick can happen with anybody. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:01, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    not mail

    Hi Armbrust, thanks for closing down the extraneous thread created at AN/I with regard to the closure of the "sanctions" discussion involving me, Medeis and Baseball Bugs. I'm sure the conspiracy theory propounded by Medeis (that the use of the word "tragic" or "tragedy") will form the basis of yet another AN/I in due course, but it would be worthwhile you reminding her that continually linking to her own self-outing will do nothing other than allow other nefarious readers to determine her location, identity etc. Giving away such vital personal information should be discouraged. I'm more than content to continue any such discussion on-wiki and yet I understand Medeis' decision to finally avoid discussing her personal life at the RDs and other places on Wikipedia. Good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    If you mean the {{hat}}-ing of the extra commentary at WP:ANRFC, than be my guest. I have not, and will not, close the ANI discussion, because (as I already said to Medeis per e-mail) it's quite long, and I don't want to read it. I also want to remain as uninvolved in this situation as possible, from which I barely know anything. Armbrust The Homunculus 00:14, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you!

    Thanks for the help with the category rename thing. I've never done this before. Can I ping you if I need help? Lightbreather (talk) 21:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    I have disabled pinging for me, so if you need help just leave a message on this page. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:25, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Claiming award from WP:REWARD (3rd time)

    Hey Armbrust! I've expanded Black-breasted Thrush, one of the articles on the list. While I've removed the stub category tag on the article, the talk page stub rating remains unchanged. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

     Awards delivered. @Crisco 1492: Two images formerly on Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused are now ready for the POTD section of the Main Page. This time they are File:Turdus dissimilis male - Ang Khang.jpg and File:Turdus dissimilis female - Ang Khang.jpg. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 01:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    A barnstar for you! (from Sven Manguard)

    The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
    For using the Reward Board to get tiny articles with featured pictures in them expanded, I hereby award you this Brilliant Idea Barnstar. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:56, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Rachel K Collier Press Image

    Hello -you recently declined the upload of a photo for Rachel K Collier on the basis that non-free images of living people cant be uploaded (at least i think was the reason!) -but i dont understand how that ties in with this page: Wikipedia:Publicity photos? I've found a link to the offical press release kit here -and the image is being used all over the place as there is clearly an implied licence for use. I'm sure I could get in touch with the photographer and get explicit written permission for it to go up on the page, if that's what's required? Also, if you can't use this image, then how do i get one up on the wikipedia page, do i have to find rachel and take one myself?! thanks for your help, would just be nice to have a picture up of her — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bitsumishi (talk • contribs) 13:33, 16 January 2014

    Yes, WP:NFC#UUI explicitly lists images of living people as unacceptable use of non-free images. Wikipedia:Publicity photos is an essay, and therefore it can't trump the Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria, which is a legal policy of Wikipedia. If you want, that an image is uploaded for the Rachel K Collier article, than you have the following options:
    1. You create an image from her, in that case you should upload the image to our free media repository, the Commons. You do not need any special permissions to upload there, and you can use the same username and password you use here.
    2. You search for a free image on the Internet. Note, that the image needs to be explicitly released under this license, and that publicly available isn't the same as public domain. If you find one, than it should go to the Commons.
    3. You contact the photographer, and if they are willing and can (see later) release the image under a free license, than follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries]. Note, however, that this will not necessarily help you, as the photo could be work for hire, in which case the employer of the photographer is the copyright-holder, and their permission is needed instead.
    Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 14:08, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Reward Board claim for Velodona

    At your earliest convenience, I invite you to peruse the article Velodona, which I have taken from 119 B to 3863 B in readable prose. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:33, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

     Awards delivered. @Crisco 1492: An octupus for the Main Page? The newest escapee from the list of Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused this time is File:Velodona togata.jpg. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 09:55, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Doable, certainly. Though for some reason your ping didn't show up. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:20, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Selected for 4 February. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Well you found it anyway. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:30, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Advice on getting a higher resolution?

    Hey! Firstly, thanks for the quick response at FP, and the clear feedback about what needs to be done. This is my first time nominating an image to FP, and even though it was speedily rejected, I had a very good newbie user experience.

    I knew the size would be a problem, but read that you sometimes make exceptions for "historical or otherwise unique images, if no higher resolution could realistically be acquired."

    So, my first question is if you have any advice on how I could acquire a higher resolution image. One answer would be to seek one from the original office that created the image, but that may prove impossible. Another answer might be to have an expert recreate the image as an svg, although I'm not sure if that would be allowed. You do this all the time--do you have any other ideas?

    Secondly, I'm a newbie to FP but an oldie to WP. I know sometimes as speedy close is merely indicative of one problem out of many. If I got my hands on a high resolution copy of the image, do you you think there's a good change it might survive FP? or are there other problems beyond just resolution, do you think?

    Thanks again for you quick assessment and NotBiting the newbie :) --HectorMoffet (talk) 10:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Hey! So I got on the horn and tracked down a scan of the physical patch. It's about 900px square (so, like 12x the old version). Because of the "pixelation" inherent in a stitched patch, increasing the scan resolution beyond 900px doesn't increase the quality of the image.
    Do you think it would be appropriate to re-nominate this as FP? or would that be frowned upon? --HectorMoffet (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    The featured picture criteria says, that the image has to have 1500 pixels in both dimensions, therefore the image is still bellow the size requirements. I would suggest not to nominate the image as it would end the same way, as the previous nomination. AFAIK there is no logo, which was promoted to FP status. The last time something similar was this coat of arms, but the FP nomination was unsuccessful, despite that it was an SVG. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:03, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Reward Board expansion for Sainte-Enimie

    I've expanded Sainte-Enimie, from the unused FP list. I've removed the stub tag but haven't done the talk page ratings. Cheers, ~HueSatLum 23:44, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

     Awards delivered. @Crisco 1492: Another image from Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused ready for the Main Page, and this it isn't an animal for a change. It's this image: File:Sainte-Enimie-Gorges du Tarn-Frankreich.jpg, a panorama of a French commune. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 00:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Request to subst a template

    Can you change {{EP|d}} to {{subst:EP|d}} on /Archive 9#Category moves? It's the last occurrence of EP that should be subst'd but isn't. Thanks, Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Never mind, I didn't realize you aren't an admin. I'll ask elsewhere. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:04, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jackmcbarn: No need to. I just asked the unprotection of the pages. Have already considered some link clean-up in them, but delayed it then, and now it's a good time to do it. BTW shouldn't the documentation page of {{EP}} be update to indicate, that it needs to be substed? Armbrust The Homunculus 23:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks; I fixed the documentation. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Now it's subst'd. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:19, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 15 January 2014

    Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mary of Hungary
    Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
    Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Mary (1505–1558), Queen of Hungary.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Armbrust The Homunculus 15:20, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Disabled pinging with a script?

    Hey, I noticed you said that you have disabled being pinged with a script. I am wondering what benefit that has over just un-checking the box on Preferences → Notifications → Mention? Just curious anyways. Technical 13 (talk) 19:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Well I actually did that, but I don't like echo very much, and prefer the orange bar of doom (which is BTW green for me). I removed the little box on top of the page with #pt-notifications {display: none} in my CSS page and than restored the old message bar with User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/orangeBar.js. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:42, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    AFD closures

    Thanks for fixing them. I've never done any AfD closing before, I'm trying to branch out..! Bishonen | talk 17:46, 24 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]

    @Bishonen: No problem. The top part of the closing templates goes only at AfD and MfD over the header. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:48, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 22 January 2014

    A brownie for you!

    Thanks For Deleting my YGOWP page! Regards, Titusfox 09:38, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the brownie, but as far I remember, I just tagged it for speedy deletion and didn't delete the page. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Heads-up

    This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
    The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

    Please do not close any xFD discussion as "delete" if you actually cannot delete the article :-) DP 11:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, that was clearly an WP:IAR situation. The results are absolutely clear, but no admin bothered to close them (even after it was pointed out to them at WT:CSD). Armbrust The Homunculus 11:54, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    The decision to never run at RFA comes back to haunt you... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:58, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    I already run twice... , and will maybe try this April again, if I can avoid being blocked. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:00, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not applicable to IAR - if you cannot actually delete the item, you should not be closing anything as delete - you make too many extra steps for others ES&L 12:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    It's certainly applicable, as the "don't close as delete" rule prevents me from "maintaining Wikipedia", and therefore I ignore it. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Please re-read WP:NAC - especially the section of "inappropriate closures". No, your actions on "delete" decisions are not helping to maintain Wikipedia. Please stop, final. ES&L 13:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    A suspended nomination

    The Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:ISS-32 American EVA b3 Aki Hoshide.jpg discussion is now conclude. You may move the close Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Space Selfie now. Thanks. Z22 (talk) 00:07, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. Thank you for pointing this out to me. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:27, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    ANRFC

    Ive reverted your removal of the NFCR section. That discussion board has been in a constant backlog since July 2012. providing a simple list of discussions that need closed helps knock those out. Please do not remove the closure requests. Werieth (talk) 14:37, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    And I have re-removed it, because WP:ANRFC isn't the place to report the backlog of WP:NFCC. If you want to make the backlog more clear, than insert a "Backlog" and "Current discussion" sections on the page, and than a link to the "Backlog" section can be added to ANRFC. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:39, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    I have re-reverted. Do not re-remove the list. Its not a simple backlog that I am reporting. The list consists of discussions that are 4x times past the closure point. Werieth (talk) 14:40, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    That's nonsense. But placing them between a {{cot}} and {{cob}} will be enough for now. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    You may think its nonsense, because you are not involved in that area, but this is far beyond a normal backlog. There have been discussions that have been open for just under 6 months. The normal discussion length is 7 days. Having discussions unclosed for 6 months is problematic. Werieth (talk) 14:48, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    When closing please remember to subst: the archive template. Werieth (talk) 16:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't think that's needed there, as it's not a board-specific template. If you disagree, than feel free to subst them, but I will not do it. Armbrust The Homunculus 16:38, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Armbrust/Archive_16&oldid=592814517"