User talk:In ictu oculi

This user's email on Toolbox menu (also icon top right hand side) is activated. /Useful

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Hello In ictu oculi,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources

• A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
• Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
• A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
• Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Fool (Raffi novel).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Fool (Raffi novel).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hoàng Quang Thuận

The article Hoàng Quang Thuận has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable person, the Vietnamese wiki page is already deleted, the sources only mention the plagiarism

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sgnpkd (talk) 15:44, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Bulkington

Following on from User talk:In ictu oculi/Archive 2019#Is/was test = what do you make of Bulkington now? At the previous discussion it was noted that the character didn't have an article, that came up most with the test but an article now exists at Bulkington (character Moby-Dick). Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:20, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Joseph Spaniola for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

Hello. Please see this discussion. Bionic (talk) 18:01, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Kauffner

You might also wish to add your comments at the mass move discussion at Talk:Nguyễn Văn Thiệu#Requested move 13 August 2020 regards Mztourist (talk) 09:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

"Whine" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Whine. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 20#Whine until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 08:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Snöfrid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stenhammar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:39, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

"Sho Sato (lawyer)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Sho Sato (lawyer). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#Sho Sato (lawyer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Lindenfall (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Ford RM

Do you think its worth opening a SPI due to all the "support" !votes from the IPs? Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but I don't think SPIs cover IPs do they? In ictu oculi (talk)

The Ranch

Hi IIO, Just to let you know, I have moved the page as requested by B2C at WP:RMTR. In doing that I was not specifically endorsing the closure, or indeed rejecting it. It's just that I think if you want to challenge it, rather than holding up the move at RMTR, to go through the normal process of requesting a review on the B2C's talk page and then taking it to WP:MRV if you still want to challenge it. That way other editors can weigh in on whether it was or was not a legitimate NAC. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 13:03, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for message. I have requested twice and B2C has refused. I think Move Review only works in exceptionally bad cases, not just not good closes. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:06, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, let's be honest, disregarding the procedural issue I think the close is defensible. Even though there was an even split of !votes, the supporters made more of a case than the opposers did - the page views were mentioned several times in support, but the claim that the older film has greater long-term significance was not really backed up with evidence. I think if I had to give an opinion I'd say this was in fact a good close. You could argue that WP:RMNAC was not followed because it was a close call and should have been left for an admin, but that argument doesn't always get supported at MRV. Either way I don't think it would be appropriate for me to overturn B2C's close unilaterally.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

For the record, my discussion with IIO immediately follows the RM I closed now at Talk:The_Ranch#Requested_move_17_August_2020. —-В²C ☎ 19:07, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Xavier Jamaux for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Less Unless (talk) 12:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Fool (Raffi novel).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Fool (Raffi novel).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:57, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Ford

Given that the company RM was closed as no consensus I think we need a new RM for the DAB. As you can see the one I filed in 2018 failed with only 1 support (who also supported moving the company to the shorter name and filed the same move in 2009). If you file it it might carry more weight but given a number of people who opposed to the company move did so based on the point that there is no primary topic (4 explicitly argued moving the DAB) we hopefully might get more support this time. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:00, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I think you have a point. But with the Indonesia-based IPs and socks around at the moment leaving it a few months might be advisable In ictu oculi (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2020 (UTC)