Jump to content

User talk:Orangemike

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dylan Seey (talk | contribs) at 11:56, 12 January 2019 (→Dear Orangemike: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Speedy deletion of File:1930s photo of the foreshore above Jeffrey Street 001 001004.jpg

hello Orangemike

Apologies if I missed earlier warnings, or if the file was incorrectly tagged however can I check please your speedy deletion of this photograph. The photograph was important to the article. The reference citation in the article on Jeffrey Street was as follows and my recollection is that a similar citation was present on the photo page:


"View to St. Aloysius' College above foreshores of Kirribilli" (photo). 1 copyprint; b&w; 204 x 254 mm, This photograph shows construction on foreshores of Kirribilli above Jeffrey Street. Above the foreshores is St. Aloysius; College incorprating Dr. Cox's home. Whilst barely visible above the trees is the tower of Star of the Sea Church. The homes Greencliffe and Craiglea are also visible on the right hand side above M. Steel boatshed. Jeffrey Street Wharf and Jeffrey Street: North Sydney Council, original publisher unknown. 1930s. Retrieved 27 June 2010. Image 001\001004

The file appears on the Local Government website and the source attributes the photo to "c 1930s". I thought (mistakenly) that all of the correct tags has been used both in the article and also on the photo page. I refer also to the Australian Copyright Council which states that in Australia Copyright has expired in photos taken prior to 1 January 1955. This photograph is therefore approximately 20 years out of copyright. Refer to the copyright regulation here.

<http://www.copyright.org.au/find-an-answer/browse-by-what-you-do/photographers/>

Can I seek your advice please as to how to reverse this or what additional "public domain" style tag you feel was missing which should have been present on this photo to cover any other countries copyright laws etc? This photo has been on this article for almost four (4) years and this is the first time that the PD status / copyright of these very old photos has been raised as an issue.

Is my deleted article stored in the Wikipedia database?

I was told my article about Claudia Caporal was deleted because it was biased and I was too "close" to her to be able to write her article. Is there a way to rescue the writing I did for it so that I may then edit it to an appropriate stage for publishing? Thank you. KatieLee92 (talk)

Periodic general health checks and the Medcan Clinic

This discussion has been moved to Talk:Medcan Clinic § Discussion, part 2.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timmccloud (talk • contribs) 20:38, 23 December 2013

Judge Alonzo Conant jpg deletion by Ronhjones

Hello, Orangemike. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Second consideration appreciated on Talk:Gregor Collins

Hi, Orange Mike, or other user - this is a request for a second look ie a consideration in deleting the "Some or all of this article's listed sources may not be reliable" note that has been on the Gregor Collins article since September of 2013. Reliable sources and additional, validated wiki links (including the recently approved article Goodbye Promise) have been provided in the interim, proving it a worthy candidate for no flags. I have no reason to be untruthful that this article is indeed associated with me but that is in no way an indication it is a puff piece or autobiographical piece, nor should it not be considered just as neutral as any other entry. If for some reason it's still considered flag-worthy I'd appreciate an updated explanation and what needs to be secured to have it fully approved. Thanks for your time. Gregorcollins (talk)

Some words on "ESNA European Higher Education News"

I removed the issues from the top of the page. After spending a few weeks gradually editing this article, I believe the tone is much more neutral, many references and links have been added to integrate it, and it relies much less on primary sources. If there is anything left to be improved, please let me know. Thanks.Template:Subset:unsigned

You're Invited!

{{WPW Referral}}

Luv Ya page

Hello Orangemike I appreciate your advice, but just to clarify, Paloma Faith is not a minor performer. Despite not being regarded as a phenomenon like Amy Winehouse or Adele she is more popular than some may realise, and even so more financially successful than some realise. I believe if my article is up to the standard of Wikipedia, my article will be accepted. Thankyou. CandidLibraryEditors — Preceding unsigned comment added by CandidLibraryEditors (talk • contribs)

(Request Article) Draft:Restaurant City

Hi @Orangemike: I made a draft article Draft:Restaurant City, can you take a look, Thanks in advance. Mayamaya7 Poke! 09:13 AM, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

WTFRgojoey (talk) 19:14, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Does anybody here read drafts and discussion posts ("talk")? No. This is why "editors" keep responding with unrelated crap such as "... your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages ..."

Peer review newsletter #1

Introduction

Hello to all! I do not intend to write a regular peer review newsletter but there does occasionally come a time when those interested in contributing to peer review should be contacted, and now is one. I've mailed this out to everyone on the peer review volunteers list, and some editors that have contributed to past discussions. Apologies if I've left you off or contacted you and you didn't want it. Next time there is a newsletter / mass message it will be opt in (here), I'll talk about this below - but first:

  • THANK YOU! I want to thank you for your contributions and for volunteering on the list to help out at peer review. Thank you!
  • Peer review is useful! It's good to have an active peer review process. This is often the way that we help new or developing editors understand our ways, and improve the quality of their editing - so it fills an important and necessary gap between the teahouse (kindly introduction to our Wikiways) and GA and FA reviews (specific standards uphelp according to a set of quality criteria). And we should try and improve this process where possible (automate, simplify) so it can be used and maintained easily.

Updates

It can get quite lonely tinkering with peer review...
With a bit of effort we can renovate the place to look like this!

Update #1: the peer review volunteers list is changing

The list is here in case you've forgotten: WP:PRV. Kadane has kindly offered to create a bot that will ping editors on the volunteers list with unanswered reviews in their chosen subject areas every so often. You can choose the time interval by changing the "contact" parameter. Options are "never", "monthly", "quarterly", "halfyearly", and "annually". For example:

  • {{PRV|JohnSmith|History of engineering|contact=monthly}} - if placed in the "History" section, JohnSmith will receive an automatic update every month about unanswered peer reviews relating to history.
  • {{PRV|JaneSmith|Mesopotamian geography, Norwegian fjords|contact=annually}} - if placed in the "Geography" section, JaneSmith will receive an automatic update every yearly about unanswered peer reviews in the geography area.

We can at this stage only use the broad peer review section titles to guide what reviews you'd like, but that's better than nothing! You can also set an interest in multiple separate subject areas that will be updated at different times.

Update #2: a (lean) WikiProject Peer review

I don't think we need a WikiProject with a giant bureaucracy nor all sorts of whiz-bang features. However over the last few years I've found there are times when it would have been useful to have a list of editors that would like to contribute to discussions about the peer review process (e.g. instructions, layout, automation, simplification etc.). Also, it can get kind of lonely on the talk page as I am (correct me if I'm wrong) the only regular contributor, with most editors moving on after 6 - 12 months.

So, I've decided to create "WikiProject Peer review". If you'd like to contribute to the WikiProject, or make yourself available for future newsletters or contact, please add yourself to the list of members.

Update #3: advertising

We plan to do some advertising of peer review, to let editors know about it and how to volunteer to help, at a couple of different venues (Signpost, Village pump, Teahouse etc.) - but have been waiting until we get this bot + WikiProject set up so we have a way to help interested editors make more enduring contributions. So consider yourself forewarned!

And... that's it!

I wish you all well on your Wikivoyages, Tom (LT) (talk) 00:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Guideline and policy news

  1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
  2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
  3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

Technical news

  • Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
  1. At least 8 characters in length
  2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
  3. Different from their username
User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.
  • Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
  • {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
  • Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apolgize To You

Hey OrangeMike I'm Sorry for what I did a couple of days for saying the wrong thing and that was a bad way to close out 2018 but I'm not going to say that again cause that is a sin. But Did you have a happy and safe New year's Day Yesterday. I Know you did but I Hope 2019 will be one of the best years of your life. Jesus loves us all he's good and he's is our lord and Savior. And you will do good things. well OrangeMike I Hope you have a happy and safe 2019. And may the good lord bless you and keep you. Have a good day and a Good year as well thank you very much. 68.103.78.155 (talk) 14:56, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Randy Rinks

Notice

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

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Boleyn (talk) 08:09, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Traduksciigo: Wikidata:WikiProject Canada

Saluton Orangemike,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvo Orangemike ĉe Wikidata. La paĝo Wikidata:WikiProject Canada estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:



Ni tre aprezos vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Wikidata funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

traduk-kunordigantoj de Wikidata‎, 01:58, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: Wikidata:WikiProject Canada

Saluton Orangemike,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvo Orangemike ĉe Wikidata. La paĝo Wikidata:WikiProject Canada estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:



Ni tre aprezos vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Wikidata funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

traduk-kunordigantoj de Wikidata‎, 15:01, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: Wikidata:WikiProject Canada

Saluton Orangemike,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvo Orangemike ĉe Wikidata. La paĝo Wikidata:WikiProject Canada estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:



Ni tre aprezos vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Wikidata funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

traduk-kunordigantoj de Wikidata‎, 15:01, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Help with the format of The Farm Group's page

Hi Orangemike,

Thanks for helping make some changes to my page earlier, I was just wondering if there are any other points that you thought could do with rewording or even rewriting from scratch? Any help or tips with improving my writing style for Wikipedia would be very appreciated.

Draft:The_Farm_Group

Thanks, Klafkowski (talk) 12:33, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Appearance as an undisclosed paid editor

In response to your message on my talk page re: draft:Richard F. Chambers , I thought I had properly disclosed my status as a paid editor. Which disclosures am I missing? Thanks! KKacir (talk) 16:02, 7 January 2019 (UTC) --[reply]

You created a blank user page, User:KKacir, but never put any disclosure language on it. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I've edited my user page. Will I need to resubmit as an AFC? KKacir (talk) 18:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin meetup

Hello. You may be interested in this in Madison on Sunday, January 27. Jonathunder (talk) 22:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Orangemike

with all due respect, the 25 points of the National Socialism Movement don't suggest white supremacy, white supremacy implies dominance, which the 25 points do not suggest. That is why I changed the ideology description from "white supremacy" to "white separatism", and to be fair, this "neutrality" that you say wikipedia stances on doesn't seem very neutral.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Orangemike&oldid=878013477"