User talk:Erpert

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

BATTLERS, CYBERBULLIES AND JUST PLAIN RUDE PEOPLE ARE NOT WELCOME TO POST HERE.

(Funny story: Someone whom I have had dealings with in the past tried to pull fast ones and have two articles that I created deleted (the operative word being "tried") without notifying me because of this very template. Now, doesn't the fact that s/he places himself in one of those categories say something about his/her own behavior?)

"Nice guys finish last..."

I guess votestacking works after all when enough people don't like something.

Barnstars I have received>>>

Heterodox Academy

Hi Erpert. Who do you believe is the COI editor on this article? And can you link to the Third Opinion request? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:28, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The COI editor appears to be Chrismartin76. And this was the initial 3O request. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 23:21, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think any admin action is needed? EdJohnston (talk) 23:46, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One point to consider, which I neglected to initially mention, is that the Heterodox Academy site was redesigned this week with new content on the page about its history. The former third opinion was given before this content was online. Also, Heterodox Academy is a small organization. In the case of most small organizations, the information you have about it will mainly come from people who have some affiliation with the organization. It is not large enough to have several books and articles by independent authors about the organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrismartin76 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please continue this discussion on that article's talk page; I have no real interest in the subject. (But to answer your question, Ed, I don't think admin action is needed quite yet.) Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 22:53, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gloria Jean's Coffees Logo

You recently replaced the logo on Gloria Jean's Coffees. The logo that had been on the page, you moved lower and implied was from the early 1990s, but it is the logo that is currently used repeatedly on the website that is linked from the article. The source that you provided for the new logo links directly to the image, so it is impossible to verify that it is in use somewhere, or where, or how. It would be good if you could update the source on the image page. ★ Bigr Tex 01:00, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Isn’t linking directly to the image exactly what the source is supposed to do? Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 01:07, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer is to point you to WP:IUP#RI. But here is the longer answer that I wrote before I finally found the short answer: Per WP:NFCCP#4, We need proof of prior publication to retain a non-free image. Having a link directly to an image does not prove that it has ever been used, it only proves that it is hosted somewhere on the internet. Linking directly to the image is frequently used to evade this requirement by uploaders who know that the use they have found is not a reasonable one. To be clear, I do not think that you are in this category. ★ Bigr Tex 19:54, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Supermarket Stakeout, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Candlelight (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 17:08, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American pornographic film actors of Thai descent has been nominated for merging

Category:American pornographic film actors of Thai descent, which you created, has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 21:06, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Third Opinion Request

Hi Erpert, I hope this message finds you well. I had recently submitted a request for a third Opinion on Patrick Harran's page. I apologize for the vague description for my request. Here is a little more detailed outline. The content in question is in regards to the Laboratory Fire on his page. The main editor of the page and myself (COI) have a disagreement about editing it. Thank you. Wikijg (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]